Text -- Acts 2:27-47 (NET)

2:27 because you will not leave my soul in Hades, nor permit your Holy One to experience decay. 2:28 You have made known to me the paths of life; you will make me full of joy with your presence.’ 2:29 “Brothers, I can speak confidently to you about our forefather David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 2:30 So then, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants on his throne, 2:31 David by foreseeing this spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did his body experience decay. 2:32 This Jesus God raised up, and we are all witnesses of it. 2:33 So then, exalted to the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father, he has poured out what you both see and hear. 2:34 For David did not ascend into heaven, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my lord, “Sit at my right hand 2:35 until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”’ 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ.”

The Response to Peter’s Address

2:37 Now when they heard this, they were acutely distressed and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “What should we do, brothers?” 2:38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 2:39 For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far away, as many as the Lord our God will call to himself.” 2:40 With many other words he testified and exhorted them saying, “Save yourselves from this perverse generation!” 2:41 So those who accepted his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand people were added.

The Fellowship of the Early Believers

2:42 They were devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 2:43 Reverential awe came over everyone, and many wonders and miraculous signs came about by the apostles. 2:44 All who believed were together and held everything in common, 2:45 and they began selling their property and possessions and distributing the proceeds to everyone, as anyone had need. 2:46 Every day they continued to gather together by common consent in the temple courts, breaking bread from house to house, sharing their food with glad and humble hearts, 2:47 praising God and having the good will of all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number every day those who were being saved.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Act 2:27

In Hades ( eis Hāidēn ).

Hades is the unseen world, Hebrew Sheol, but here it is viewed as death itself "considered as a rapacious destroyer"(Hackett). It does not mean the place of punishment, though both heaven and the place of torment are in Hades (Luk 16:23). "Death and Hades are strictly parallel terms: he who is dead is in Hades"(Page). The use of eis here=en is common enough. The Textus Receptus here reads eis Hāidou (genitive case) like the Attic idiom with domon (abode) understood. "Hades"in English is not translation, but transliteration. The phrase in the Apostles’ Creed, "descended into hell"is from this passage in Acts (Hades, not Gehenna). The English word "hell"is Anglo-Saxon from helan , to hide, and was used in the Authorized Version to translate both Hades as here and Gehenna as in Mat 5:22.

Robertson: Act 2:27

Thy Holy One ( ton hosion sou ).

Peter applies these words to the Messiah.

Robertson: Act 2:27

Corruption ( diaphthoran ).

The word can mean destruction or putrefaction from diaphtheirō , old word, but in N.T. only here and Act 13:34-37. The Hebrew word in Psa 16:1-11 can mean also the pit or the deep.

Robertson: Act 2:28

The ways of life ( hodous zōēs ).

Though dead God will show him the ways back to life.

Robertson: Act 2:29

I may say ( exon eipein ).

Supply estin before exon , periphrastic present indicative of exeimi , to allow, permit. The Authorized Version has "Let me speak,"supplying esto present imperative.

Robertson: Act 2:29

Freely ( meta parrēsias ).

Telling it all (pan , rhēsia from eipon , to speak), with fulness, with boldness. Luke is fond of the phrase (as in Act 4:13). It is a new start for Simon Peter, full of boldness and courage.

Robertson: Act 2:29

The patriarch ( tou patriarchou ).

Transliteration of the word, from patria , family, and archō , to rule, the founder of a family. Late word in lxx. Used of Abraham (Heb 7:4), of the twelve sons of Jacob as founders of the several tribes (Act 7:8), and here of David as head of the family from whom the Messiah comes.

Robertson: Act 2:29

Was buried ( etaphē ).

Second aorist passive indicative of thaptō . His tomb was on Matthew. Zion where most of the kings were buried. The tomb was said to have fallen into ruins in the time of the Emperor Hadrian. Josephus ( Ant. XVI. 7, 1) attributes most of the misfortunes of Herod’ s family to the fact that he tried to rifle the tomb of David.

Robertson: Act 2:31

Foreseeing ( proidōn ).

Second aorist active participle. Did it as a prophet.

Robertson: Act 2:31

Of the Christ ( tou Christou ).

Of the Messiah. See under Act 2:32. This is a definite statement by Peter that David knew that in Psa 16:1-11 he was describing the resurrection of the Messiah.

Robertson: Act 2:32

This Jesus ( touton ton Iēsoun ).

Many of the name "Jesus,"but he means the one already called "the Nazarene"(Act 2:22) and foretold as the Messiah in Psa 16:1-11 and raised from the dead by God in proof that he is the Messiah (Act 2:24, Act 2:32), "this Jesus whom ye crucified"(Act 2:36). Other terms used of him in the Acts are the Messiah, Act 2:31, the one whom God "anointed"(Act 10:38), as in Joh 1:41, Jesus Christ (Act 9:34). In Act 2:36 God made this Jesus Messiah, in Act 3:20 the Messiah Jesus, in Act 17:3 Jesus is the Messiah, in Act 18:5 the Messiah is Jesus, in Act 24:24 Christ Jesus.

Robertson: Act 2:32

Whereof ( hou ).

Or "of whom."Either makes sense and both are true. Peter claims the whole 120 as personal witnesses to the fact of the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead and they are all present as Peter calls them to witness on the point. In Galilee over 500 had seen the Risen Christ at one time (1Co 15:6) most of whom were still living when Paul wrote. Thus the direct evidence for the resurrection of Jesus piles up in cumulative force.

Robertson: Act 2:33

By the right hand of God ( tēi dexiāi tou theou ).

This translation makes it the instrumental case. The margin has it "at"instead of "by,"that is the locative case. And it will make sense in the true dative case, "to the right hand of God."These three cases came to have the same form in Greek. Rom 8:24 furnishes another illustration of like ambiguity (tēi elpidi ), saved by hope, in hope, or for hope. Usually it is quite easy to tell the case when the form is identical.

Robertson: Act 2:33

Exalted ( hupsōtheis ).

First aorist passive participle of hupsoō , to lift up. Here both the literal and tropical sense occurs. Cf. Joh 12:32.

Robertson: Act 2:33

The promise of the Holy Spirit ( tēn epaggelian tou pneumatos tou hagiou ).

The promise mentioned in Act 1:4 and now come true, consisting in the Holy Spirit "from the Father"(para tou patros ), sent by the Father and by the Son (Joh 15:26; Joh 16:7). See also Gal 3:14.

Robertson: Act 2:33

He hath poured forth ( execheen ).

Aorist active indicative of ekcheō the verb used by Joel and quoted by Peter already in Act 2:17, Act 2:18. Jesus has fulfilled his promise.

Robertson: Act 2:33

This which ye see and hear ( touto ho humeis kai blepete kai akouete ).

This includes the sound like the rushing wind, the tongues like fire on each of them, the different languages spoken by the 120. "The proof was before their eyes in this new energy from heaven"(Furneaux), a culminating demonstration that Jesus was the Messiah.

Robertson: Act 2:34

Ascended not ( ou̇̇anebē ).

It is more emphatic than that: For not David ascended into the heavens. Peter quotes Psa 110:1 as proof. No passage in the O.T. is so constantly quoted as Messianic as this. "St. Peter does not demand belief upon his own assertion, but he again appeals to the Scriptures, and to words which could not have received a fulfilment in the case of David"(Knowling).

Robertson: Act 2:34

Sit thou ( kathou ).

Late Koiné[28928]š form for earlier kathēso , present middle imperative second singular of kathēmai .

Robertson: Act 2:35

Till I make ( heōs an thō ).

Second aorist active subjunctive of tithēmi with an after heōs for the future, a common Greek idiom. This dominion of Christ as Mediator will last till the plan of the kingdom is carried out (1Co 15:23-28). Complete subjugation will come, perhaps referring to the custom of victorious kings placing their feet upon the necks of their enemies (Jos 10:24).

Robertson: Act 2:35

Therefore assuredly ( Asphalōs oun ).

Assuredly therefore, without any slip or trip (asphalēs from a privative and sphallō , to trip, to slip. Peter draws a powerfully pungent conclusion by the use of the adverb asphalōs and the inferential conjunction oun . Peter’ s closing sentence drives home the point of his sermon: "This very Jesus whom ye crucified (note humeis , strongly emphatic ye ), him God made both Lord and Messiah"(kai kurion kai Christon ), as David foretold in Psa 110:1-7 and as the events of this day have confirmed. The critics are disturbed over how Luke could have gotten the substance of this masterful address spoken on the spur of the moment with passion and power. They even say that Luke composed it for Peter and put the words in his mouth. If so, he made a good job of it. But Peter could have written out the notes of the address afterwards. Luke had plenty of chances to get hold of it from Peter or from others.

Robertson: Act 2:37

They were pricked in their heart ( katenugēsan tēn kardian ).

Second aorist indicative of katanussō , a rare verb (lxx) to pierce, to sting sharply, to stun, to smite. Homer used it of horses dinting the earth with their hoofs. The substantive katanuxis occurs in Rom 11:8. Here only in the N.T. It is followed here by the accusative of the part affected, the heart.

Robertson: Act 2:37

What shall we do? ( Ti poiēsōmen ).

Deliberative subjunctive first aorist active. The sermon went home, they felt the sting of Peter’ s words, compunction (compungo ). Codex Bezae adds: "Show us."

Robertson: Act 2:38

Repent ye ( metanoēsate ).

First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You crucified this Jesus. Now crown him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first.

Robertson: Act 2:38

And be baptized every one of you ( kai baptisthētō hekastos hūmōn ).

Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized."Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ"(en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou ). In accordance with the command of Jesus in Mat 28:19 (eis to onoma ). No distinction is to be insisted on between eis to onoma and en tōi onomati with baptizō since eis and en are really the same word in origin. In Act 10:48 en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou occurs, but eis to onoma in Act 8:16; Act 19:5. The use of onoma means in the name or with the authority of one as eis onoma prophētou (Mat 10:41) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in Mat 28:19, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See note on Mat 28:19 for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord"(Page).

Robertson: Act 2:38

Unto the remission of your sins ( eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn hūmōn ).

This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1Co 2:7 eis doxan hēmōn (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of eis for aim or purpose. It is seen in Mat 10:41 in three examples eis onoma prophētou , dikaiou , mathētou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Mat 12:41 about the preaching of Jonah (eis to kērugma Iōna ). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné[28928]š generally (Robertson, Grammar , p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.

Robertson: Act 2:38

The gift of the Holy Ghost ( tēn dōrean tou hagiou pneumatos ).

The gift consists (Act 8:17) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

Robertson: Act 2:39

The promise ( hē epaggelia ).

The promise made by Jesus (Act 1:4) and foretold by Joel (Act 2:18).

Robertson: Act 2:39

To you ( humin ).

You Jews. To your descendants, sons and daughters of Act 2:17.

Robertson: Act 2:39

To all that are afar off ( pāsin tois eis makran . The horizon widens and includes the Gentiles. Those "afar off"from the Jews were the heathen (Isa 49:1; Isa 57:19; Eph 2:13, Eph 2:17).

The rabbis so used it.

Robertson: Act 2:39

Shall call ( an proskalesētai ).

First aorist middle subjunctive with an in an indefinite relative clause, a perfectly regular construction. The Lord God calls men of every nation anywhere whether Jews or Gentiles. It may be doubted how clearly Peter grasped the significance of these words for he will have trouble over this very matter on the housetop in Joppa and in Caesarea, but he will see before long the full sweep of the great truth that he here proclaims under the impulse of the Holy Spirit. It was a great moment that Peter here reaches.

Robertson: Act 2:40

With many other words ( heterois logois pleiosin ).

Instrumental case. Not necessarily "different"(heterois ), but "further,"showing that Luke does not pretend to give all that Peter said. This idea is also brought out clearly by pleiosin ("more,"not "many"), more than these given by Luke.

Robertson: Act 2:40

He testified ( diemarturato ).

First aorist middle of diamarturomai , old verb, to make solemn attestation or call to witness (perfective use of dia ), while martureō is to bear witness. Page insists that here it should be translated "protested solemnly"to the Jews as it seems to mean in Luk 16:28; Act 20:23; 1Ti 5:21; 2Ti 2:14; 2Ti 4:1.

Robertson: Act 2:40

And exhorted ( kai parekalei ).

Imperfect active, kept on exhorting.

Robertson: Act 2:40

Save yourselves ( sōthēte ).

First aorist passive of sōzō . Literally, Be ye saved.

Robertson: Act 2:40

Crooked ( skolias ).

Old word, opposite of orthos , straight. Pravus the opposite of rectus , a perversity for turning off from the truth. Cf. Luk 9:41; Phi 2:15.

Robertson: Act 2:41

They then ( Hoi men oun ).

A common phrase in Acts either without antithesis as in Act 1:6; Act 5:41; Act 8:4, Act 8:25; Act 9:31; Act 11:19; Act 16:5; or with it as here, Act 8:25; Act 13:4; Act 14:3; Act 17:17; Act 23:31; Act 25:4. Oun connects with what precedes as the result of Peter’ s sermon while men points forward to what is to follow.

Robertson: Act 2:41

Were baptized ( ebaptisthēsan ).

First aorist passive indicative, constative aorist. Note that only those who had already received the word and were converted were baptized.

Robertson: Act 2:41

There were added ( prosetethēsan ).

First aorist passive indicative of prostithēmi , old verb to add, to join to. Luke means that the 3,000 were added to the 120 already enlisted. It is not stated they were all baptized by Peter or the twelve or all on the same day, though that is the natural implication of the language. The numerous pools in Jerusalem afforded ample opportunity for such wholesale baptizing and Hackett notes that the habit of orientals would place no obstacle in the way of the use of the public reservoirs. Furneaux warns us that all the 3,000 may not have been genuine converts and that many of them were pilgrims at the passover who returned home.

Robertson: Act 2:41

Souls ( psuchai ).

Persons as in Act 2:43.

Robertson: Act 2:42

They continued steadfastly ( ēsan proskarturountes ).

Periphrastic active imperfect of proskartureō as in Act 1:14 (same participle in Act 2:46).

Robertson: Act 2:42

Fellowship ( Koinōniāi ).

Old word from Koinōnos (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from Koinos what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phi 2:1) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phi 1:5) or contribution for those in need (2Co 8:4; 2Co 9:13). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of Koinōnia in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in Act 2:44or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord’ s Supper (as in 1Co 10:16) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or agapae (love-feasts).

Robertson: Act 2:42

The breaking of bread ( tēi klasei tou artou ).

The word klasis is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luk 24:35; Act 2:42), though the verb klaō occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in Act 2:46. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in Luk 24:35 or to the Lord’ s Supper. The same verb klaō is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luk 24:30) or the Lord’ s Supper (Luk 22:19). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord’ s Supper at first, a combination called agapai or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted"(Hackett). This led to some abuses as in 1Co 11:20. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord’ s Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain tēi klasei tou artou as=‘ The Holy Communion’ is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers"(Page). But in Act 20:7 they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord’ s Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here.

Robertson: Act 2:42

The prayers ( tais proseuchais ).

Services where they prayed as in Act 1:14, in the temple (Act 3:1), in their homes (Act 4:23).

Robertson: Act 2:43

Came ( egineto ).

Imperfect middle, kept on coming.

Robertson: Act 2:43

Were done ( egineto ).

Same tense. Awe kept on coming on all and signs and wonders kept on coming through the apostles. The two things went on pari passu , the more wonders the more fear.

Robertson: Act 2:44

Were together ( ēsan epi to auto ).

Some MSS. ēsan kai (were and). But they were together in the same place as in Act 2:1.

Robertson: Act 2:44

And had ( kai eichon ).

Imperfect active, kept on having, a habit in the present emergency.

Robertson: Act 2:44

Common ( Koinéa ).

It was not actual communism, but they held all their property ready for use for the common good as it was needed (Act 4:32). This situation appears nowhere else except in Jerusalem and was evidently due to special conditions there which did not survive permanently. Later Paul will take a special collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem.

Robertson: Act 2:45

Sold ( epipraskon ).

Imperfect active, a habit or custom from time to time. Old and common verb, pipraskō .

Robertson: Act 2:45

Parted ( diemerizon ).

Imperfect again of diamerizō , old verb for dividing or distributing between (dia ) people.

Robertson: Act 2:45

According as any man had need ( kathoti an tis chreian eichen ).

Regular Greek idiom for comparative clause with an and imperfect indicative corresponding precisely with the three preceding imperfects (Robertson, Grammar , p. 967).

Robertson: Act 2:46

With one accord in the temple ( homothumadon en tōi hierōi ).

See note on Act 1:14 for homothumadon . They were still worshipping in the temple for no breach had yet come between Christians and Jews. Daily they were here and daily breaking bread at home (kat' oikon ) which looks like the regular meal.

Robertson: Act 2:46

They did take their food ( metelambanon trophēs ).

Imperfect tense again and clearly referring to the regular meals at home. Does it refer also to the possible agapai or to the Lord’ s Supper afterwards as they had common meals "from house to house"(kat' oikon )? We know there were local churches in the homes where they had "worship rooms,"the church in the house. At any rate it was "with singleness"(aphelotēti ) of heart. The word occurs only here in the N.T., though a late Koiné[28928]š word (papyri). It comes from aphelēs , free from rock (phelleus is stony ground), smooth. The old form was apheleia .

Robertson: Act 2:47

Having favor ( echontes charin ).

Cf. Luk 2:52 of the Boy Jesus.

Robertson: Act 2:47

Added ( prosetithei ).

Imperfect active, kept on adding. If the Lord only always "added"those who join our churches. Note Act 2:41where same verb is used of the 3,000.

Robertson: Act 2:47

To them ( epi to auto ).

Literally, "together."Why not leave it so? "To the church"(tēi ekklēsiāi ) is not genuine. Codex Bezae has "in the church."

Robertson: Act 2:47

Those that were being saved ( tous sōzomenous ).

Present passive participle. Probably for repetition like the imperfect prosetithei . Better translate it "those saved from time to time."It was a continuous revival, day by day. Sōzō like sōtēria is used for "save"in three senses (beginning, process, conclusion), but here repetition is clearly the point of the present tense.

Vincent: Act 2:27

Leave ( ἐγκαταλείψεις )

Lit., leave behind.

Vincent: Act 2:27

Suffer ( δώσεις )

Lit., give.

Vincent: Act 2:29

Let me speak ( ἐξὸν εἰπεῖν )

Lit., it is permitted me. Rev., I may . It is allowable for him to speak, because the facts are notorious.

Vincent: Act 2:29

Freely ( μετὰ παῤῥησίας )

Lit., with freedom. The latter word from πᾶν , all, and ῥῆσις , speech; speaking everything, and therefore without reserve.

Vincent: Act 2:29

The patriarch ( πατριάρχου )

From ἄρχω , to begin, and πατριά , a pedigree. Applied to David as the father of the royal family from which the Messiah sprang. It is used in the New Testament of Abraham (Heb 7:4), and of the sons of Jacob (Act 7:8).

Vincent: Act 2:29

He is dead and buried ( ἐτελεύτησε καὶ ἐτάφη )

Aorists, denoting what occurred at a definite past time. Rev., rightly, he both died and was buried.

Vincent: Act 2:29

His sepulchre is with us

Or among us (ἐν ἡμῖν ). On Mount Zion, where most of the Jewish kings were interred in the same tomb.

Vincent: Act 2:30

According to the flesh, he would raise up Christ

The best texts omit. Render as Rev., he would set one upon his throne.

Vincent: Act 2:34

Is not ascended ( οὐ ἀνέβη )

Aorist, did not ascend.

Vincent: Act 2:35

Thy footstool

A.V. omits of thy feet.

Vincent: Act 2:36

Assuredly ( ἀσφαλῶς )

From ἀ , not, and σφάλλω , to cause to fall. Hence, firmly , steadfastly.

Vincent: Act 2:37

They were pricked ( κατενύγησαν )

Only here in New Testament. The word does not occur in profane Greek. It is found in the Septuagint, as Genesis 34:7, of the grief of the sons of Jacob at the dishonor of Dinah. See, also, Psa 109:16(Sept. 108) Psa 109:16 : " broken in heart." The kindred noun κατάνυξις occurs Rom 11:8, in the sense of slumber (Rev., stupor ) . Compare Isa 29:10. See, also, Psa 60:3. (Sept. 59) Psa 60:3 : οἶνον κατανύξεως , the wine of astonishment (Rev., wine of staggering ) . The radical idea of the word is given in the simple verb νύσσω , to prick with a sharp point. So Homer, of the puncture of a spear; of horses dinting the earth with their hoofs, etc. Here, therefore, of the sharp, painful emotion, the sting produced by Peter's words. Cicero, speaking of the oratory of Pericles, says that his speech left stings in the minds of his hearers (" De Oratore," iii., 34.)

Vincent: Act 2:38

Repent

See on Mat 3:2.

Vincent: Act 2:38

In the name ( ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι )

Lit., upon the name. See on Mat 28:19.

Vincent: Act 2:38

Remission

See on Luk 3:3; and Jam 5:15.

Vincent: Act 2:39

Afar off ( εἰς μακρὰν )

Lit., unto a long way. Referring probably to the Gentiles, who are described by this phrase both in the Old and New Testaments. See Zec 6:15; Eph 2:11-13. Peter knew the fact that the Gentiles were to be received into the Church, but not the mode . He expected they would become Christians through the medium of the Jewish religion. It was already revealed in the Old Testament that they should be received, and Christ himself had commanded the apostles to preach to all nations.

Vincent: Act 2:39

Shall call ( προσκαλέσηται )

Rev. gives the force of πρός , to: " shall call unto him. "

Vincent: Act 2:40

Other ( ἑτέροις )

And various.

Vincent: Act 2:40

Did he testify ( διεμαρτύρετο )

The preposition διά gives the force of solemnly, earnestly.

Vincent: Act 2:40

Save yourselves ( σώθητε )

More strictly, be ye saved.

Vincent: Act 2:40

Untoward ( σκολιᾶς )

Lit., crooked. Toward in earlier English meant docile, apt. The opposite is froward ( froward ) . So Shakespeare:

" 'Tis a good hearing when children are toward ,

But a harsh hearing when women are froward. "

Taming of the Shrew , v., 2.

" Spoken like a toward prince."

3 Henry VI., ii., 2.

Untoward, therefore, meant intractable, perverse. So Shakespeare:

" What means this scorn, thou most untoward knave ?"

K. John , i, 1.

" And if she be froward,

Then hast thou taught Hortensio to be untoward."

Taming of the Shrew , iv., 5.

Compare Deu 32:5.

Vincent: Act 2:42

Continued steadfastly

See on Act 1:14.

Vincent: Act 2:42

Doctrine ( διδαχῇ )

Better, teaching .

Vincent: Act 2:42

Fellowship ( κοινωνίᾳ )

From κοινός , common. A relation between individuals which involves a common interest and a mutual, active participation in that interest and in each other. The word answers to the Latin communio, from communis, common. Hence, sometimes rendered communion, as 1Co 10:16; 2Co 13:14. Fellowship is the most common rendering. Thus Phi 1:5 : " your fellowship in the gospel," signifying co-operation in the widest sense ; participation in sympathy, suffering, and labor. Compare 1Jo 1:3, 1Jo 1:6, 1Jo 1:7. Occasionally it is used to express the particular form which the spirit of fellowship assumes; as in Rom 15:26; Heb 13:16, where it signifies the giving of alms, but always with an emphasis upon the principle of Christian fellowship which underlies the gift.

Vincent: Act 2:42

Breaking ( κλάσει )

Used by Luke only, and only in the phrase breaking of bread. The kindred verb κλάζω or κλάω , to break, occurs often, but, like the noun, only of breaking bread. Hence used to designate the celebration of the Lord's Supper.

Vincent: Act 2:42

Prayers ( προσευχαῖς )

Always of prayer to God. Compare on δεήσεις , prayers, Luk 5:33; and besought, Luk 8:38.

Vincent: Act 2:43

Fear ( φόβος )

Not terror, but reverential awe: as Mar 4:41; Luk 7:16; 1Pe 1:17, etc.

Vincent: Act 2:44

Common ( κοινὰ )

Compare fellowship, Act 2:42.

Vincent: Act 2:45

Possessions ( κτήματα )

Landed property.

Vincent: Act 2:45

Goods ( ὑπάρξεις )

Possessions in general; movables.

Vincent: Act 2:46

With one accord ( ὁμοθυμαδὸν )

See on Mat 18:19.

Vincent: Act 2:46

From house to house ( κατ ' οἶκον )

Better, as Rev., at home, contrasted with in the temple. Compare Phm 1:2; Col 4:15; 1Co 16:19.

Vincent: Act 2:46

Did eat their meat ( μετελάμβανον τροφῆς )

Rev., take their food. Partake would be better, giving the force of μετά , with. Note the imperfect: " continued to partake."

Vincent: Act 2:46

Singleness ( ἀφελότητι )

Only here in New Testament. Derived from ἀ , not, and φελλεύς , stony ground. Hence of something simple or plain.

Vincent: Act 2:47

Added ( προσετίθει )

Imperfect: kept adding.

Vincent: Act 2:47

Such as should be saved ( τοὺς σωζομένους )

Lit., as Rev., those that were being saved. The rendering of the A. V. would require the verb to be in the future, whereas it is the present participle. Compare 1Co 1:18. Salvation is a thing of the present, as well as of the past and future. The verb is used in all these senses in the New Testament. Thus, we were saved (not are, as A. V.), Rom 8:24; shall or shalt be saved, Rom 10:9, Rom 10:13; ye are being saved, 1Co 15:2. " Godliness, righteousness, is life, is salvation. And it is hardly necessary to say that the divorce of morality and religion must be fostered and encouraged by failing to note this, and so laying the whole stress either on the past or on the future - on the first call, or on the final change. It is, therefore, important that the idea of salvation as a rescue from sin, through the knowledge of God in Christ, and therefore a progressive condition, a present state, should not be obscured, and we can but regret such a translation as Act 2:47, 'The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved,' where the Greek implies a different idea" (Lightfoot, " On a Fresh Revision of the New Testament" ).

Vincent: Act 2:47

To the church

See on Mat 16:18.

Wesley: Act 2:27

The invisible world. But it does not appear, that ever our Lord went into hell. His soul, when it was separated from the body, did not go thither, but to paradise, Luk 23:43. The meaning is, Thou wilt not leave my soul in its separate state, nor suffer my body to be corrupted.

Wesley: Act 2:28

That is, Thou hast raised me from the dead.

Wesley: Act 2:28

When I ascend to thy right hand.

Wesley: Act 2:29

A more honourable title than king.

Wesley: Act 2:30

Psa 89:4, &c.

Wesley: Act 2:32

St. Peter argues thus: It is plain, David did not speak this of himself. Therefore he spake of Christ's rising. But how does that promise of a kingdom imply his resurrection? Because he did not receive it before he died, and because his kingdom was to endure for ever, 2Sa 7:13.

Wesley: Act 2:33

By the right hand; that is, the mighty power of God. Our Lord was exalted at his ascension to God's right hand in heaven.

Wesley: Act 2:34

In this and the following verse is an allusion to two ancient customs; one, to the highest honour that used to be paid to persons by placing them on the right hand, as Solomon did Bathsheba, when sitting on his throne, 1Ki 2:19; and the other, to the custom of conquerors, who used to tread on the necks of their vanquished enemies, as a token of their entire victory and triumph over them.

Wesley: Act 2:35

This text is here quoted with the greatest address, as suggesting in the words of David, their great prophetic monarch, how certain their own ruin must be, if they went on to oppose Christ. Psa 110:1.

Wesley: Act 2:36

Jesus, after his exaltation, is constantly meant by this word in the New Testament, unless sometimes where it occurs, in a text quoted from the Old Testament.

Wesley: Act 2:37

They did not style them so before.

Wesley: Act 2:38

And hereby return to God: be baptized - Believing in the name of Jesus - And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost - See the three - one God clearly proved. See Act 26:20. The gift of the Holy Ghost does not mean in this place the power of speaking with tongues. For the promise of this was not given to all that were afar off, in distant ages and nations. But rather the constant fruits of faith, even righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Wesley: Act 2:38

(Whether they are Jews or Gentiles) by his word and by his Spirit: and who are not disobedient to the heavenly calling. But it is observable St. Peter did not yet understand the very words he spoke.

Wesley: Act 2:40

In such an accepted time we should add line upon line, and not leave off, till the thing is done.

Wesley: Act 2:40

Many of whom were probably mocking still.

Wesley: Act 2:41

To the hundred and twenty.

Wesley: Act 2:42

So their daily Church communion consisted in these four particulars: Hearing the word; Having all things common; Receiving the Lord's Supper; Prayer.

Ye diff'rent sects, who all declare, Lo here is Christ, and Christ is there; Your stronger proofs divinely give, And show me where the Christians live!

Wesley: Act 2:43

Of those who did not join with them: whereby persecution was prevented, till it was needful for them.

Wesley: Act 2:45

Their lands and houses; and goods - Their movables.

Wesley: Act 2:45

To say the Christians did this only till the destruction of Jerusalem, is not true; for many did it long after. Not that there was any positive command for so doing: it needed not; for love constrained them. It was a natural fruit of that love wherewith each member of the community loved every other as his own soul. And if the whole Christian Church had continued in this spirit, this usage must have continued through all ages. To affirm therefore that Christ did not design it should continue, is neither more nor less than to affirm, that Christ did not design this measure of love should continue. I see no proof of this.

Wesley: Act 2:46

breaking the bread - in the Lord's Supper, as did many Churches for some ages.

Wesley: Act 2:46

They carried the same happy and holy temper through all their common actions: eating and working with the same spirit wherewith they prayed and received the Lord's Supper.

Wesley: Act 2:47

From their sins: from the guilt and power of them.

JFB: Act 2:22-28

Rather, "authenticated," "proved," or "demonstrated to be from God."

JFB: Act 2:22-28

This is not a low view of our Lord's miracles, as has been alleged, nor inconsistent with Joh 2:11, but is in strict accordance with His progress from humiliation to glory, and with His own words in Joh 5:19. This view of Christ is here dwelt on to exhibit to the Jews the whole course of Jesus of Nazareth as the ordinance and doing of the God of Israel [ALFORD].

JFB: Act 2:27

In its disembodied state (see on Luk 16:23).

JFB: Act 2:27

In the grave.

JFB: Act 2:28

That is, resurrection-life.

JFB: Act 2:28

That is, in glory; as is plain from the whole connection and the actual words of the sixteenth Psalm.

JFB: Act 2:29-36

Peter, full of the Holy Ghost, sees in this sixteenth Psalm, one Holy Man, whose life of high devotedness and lofty spirituality is crowned with the assurance, that though He taste of death, He shall rise again without seeing corruption, and be admitted to the bliss of God's immediate presence. Now as this was palpably untrue of David, it could be meant only of One other, even of Him whom David was taught to expect as the final Occupant of the throne of Israel. (Those, therefore, and they are many, who take David himself to be the subject of this Psalm, and the words quoted to refer to Christ only in a more eminent sense, nullify the whole argument of the apostle). The Psalm is then affirmed to have had its only proper fulfilment in JESUS, of whose resurrection and ascension they were witnesses, while the glorious effusion of the Spirit by the hand of the ascended One, setting an infallible seal upon all, was even then witnessed by the thousands who stood listening to Him. A further illustration of Messiah's ascension and session at God's right hand is drawn from Psa 110:1, in which David cannot be thought to speak of himself, seeing he is still in his grave.

JFB: Act 2:36

That is, to sum up all.

JFB: Act 2:36

For in this first discourse the appeal is formally made to the whole house of Israel, as the then existing Kingdom of God.

JFB: Act 2:36

By indisputable facts, fulfilled predictions, and the seal of the Holy Ghost set upon all.

JFB: Act 2:36

For Peter's object was to show them that, instead of interfering with the arrangements of the God of Israel, these events were His own high movements.

JFB: Act 2:36

"The sting is at the close" [BENGEL]. To prove to them merely that Jesus was the Messiah might have left them all unchanged in heart. But to convince them that He whom they had crucified had been by the right hand of God exalted, and constituted the "LORD" whom David in spirit adored, to whom every knee shall bow, and the CHRIST of God, was to bring them to "look on Him whom they had pierced and mourn for Him."

JFB: Act 2:37-40

The begun fulfilment of Zec 12:10, whose full accomplishment is reserved for the day when "all Israel shall be saved" (see on Rom 11:26).

JFB: Act 2:37-40

This is that beautiful spirit of genuine compunction and childlike docility, which, discovering its whole past career to have been one frightful mistake, seeks only to be set right for the future, be the change involved and the sacrifices required what they may. So Saul of Tarsus (Act 9:6).

JFB: Act 2:38

The word denotes change of mind, and here includes the reception of the Gospel as the proper issue of that revolution of mind which they were then undergoing.

JFB: Act 2:38

As the visible seal of that remission.

JFB: Act 2:39

Of the Holy Ghost, through the risen Saviour, as the grand blessing of the new covenant.

JFB: Act 2:39

The Gentiles, as in Eph 2:17), but "to the Jew first."

JFB: Act 2:40

Thus we have here but a summary of Peter's discourse; though from the next words it would seem that only the more practical parts, the home appeals, are omitted.

JFB: Act 2:40

As if Peter already foresaw the hopeless impenitence of the nation at large, and would have his hearers hasten in for themselves and secure their own salvation.

JFB: Act 2:41-47

"It is difficult to say how three thousand could be baptized in one day, according to the old practice of a complete submersion; and the more as in Jerusalem there was no water at hand except Kidron and a few pools. The difficulty can only be removed by supposing that they already employed sprinkling, or baptized in houses in large vessels. Formal submersion in rivers, or larger quantities of water, probably took place only where the locality conveniently allowed it" [OLSHAUSEN].

JFB: Act 2:41-47

Fitting inauguration of the new kingdom, as an economy of the Spirit!

JFB: Act 2:42

"attended constantly upon."

JFB: Act 2:42

"teaching"; giving themselves up to the instructions which, in their raw state, would be indispensable to the consolidation of the immense multitude suddenly admitted to visible discipleship.

JFB: Act 2:42

In its largest sense.

JFB: Act 2:42

Not certainly in the Lord's Supper alone, but rather in frugal repasts taken together, with which the Lord's Supper was probably conjoined until abuses and persecution led to the discontinuance of the common meal.

JFB: Act 2:42

Probably, stated seasons of it.

JFB: Act 2:43

A deep awe rested upon the whole community.

JFB: Act 2:44

(See on Act 4:34-37).

JFB: Act 2:46

Observing the hours of Jewish worship.

JFB: Act 2:46

Rather, "at home" (Margin), that is, in private, as contrasted with their temple-worship, but in some stated place or places of meeting.

JFB: Act 2:46

"exultation."

and singleness of heart.

JFB: Act 2:47

"Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart, for God now accepteth thy works" (Ecc 9:7, also see on Act 8:39).

JFB: Act 2:47

Commending themselves by their lovely demeanor to the admiration of all who observed them.

JFB: Act 2:47

That is, JESUS, as the glorified Head and Ruler of the Church.

JFB: Act 2:47

Kept adding; that is, to the visible community of believers, though the words "to the Church" are wanting in the most ancient manuscripts.

JFB: Act 2:47

Rather, "the saved," or "those who were being saved." "The young Church had but few peculiarities in its outward form, or even in its doctrine: the single discriminating principle of its few members was that they all recognized the crucified Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. This confession would have been a thing of no importance, if it had only presented itself as a naked declaration, and would never in such a case have been able to form a community that would spread itself over the whole Roman empire. It acquired its value only through the power of the Holy Ghost, passing from the apostles as they preached to the hearers; for He brought the confession from the very hearts of men (1Co 12:3), and like a burning flame made their souls glow with love. By the power of this Spirit, therefore, we behold the first Christians not only in a state of active fellowship, but also internally changed: the narrow views of the natural man are broken through; they have their possessions in common, and they regard themselves as one family" [OLSHAUSEN].|| 26998||1||11||0||@@PETER HEALS A LAME MAN AT THE TEMPLE GATE--HS ADDRESS TO THE WONDERING MULTITUDE.==== (Acts 3:1-26)

JFB: Act 2:47

Already associated by their Master, first with James (Mar 1:29; Mar 5:37; Mar 9:2), then by themselves (Luk 22:8; and see Joh 13:23-24). Now we find them constantly together, but John (yet young) only as a silent actor.

JFB: Act 2:47

Were going up, were on their way.

Clarke: Act 2:27

Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell - Εις Ἁιδου, in hades, that is, the state of separate spirits, or the state of the dead. Hades was a general term among the Greek writers, by which they expressed this state; and this Hades was Tartarus to the wicked, and Elysium to the good. See the explanation of the word in the note on Mat 11:23 (note)

Clarke: Act 2:27

To see corruption - Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return, was a sentence pronounced on man after the fall: therefore this sentence could be executed on none but those who were fallen; but Jesus, being conceived without sin, neither partook of human corruption, nor was involved in the condemnation of fallen human nature; consequently, it was impossible for his body to see corruption; and it could not have undergone the temporary death, to which it was not naturally liable, had it not been for the purpose of making an atonement. It was therefore impossible that the human nature of our Lord could be subject to corruption: for though it was possible that the soul and it might be separated for a time, yet, as it had not sinned, it was not liable to dissolution; and its immortality was the necessary consequence of its being pure from transgression.

Clarke: Act 2:28

Thou hast made known to me the ways of life - That is, the way from the region of death, or state of the dead and separate spirits; so that I shall resume the same body, and live the same kind of life, as I had before I gave up my life for the sin of the world.

Clarke: Act 2:29

Let me speak freely - of the patriarch David - In Midris Tillin, it is said, in a paraphrase on the words, my flesh shall rest in hope, "Neither worm nor insect had power over David."It is possible that this opinion prevailed in the time of St. Peter, and, if so, his words are the more pointed and forcible; and therefore thus applied by Dr. Lightfoot: "That this passage, Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell, etc., is not to be applied to David himself appears in that I may confidently aver concerning him, that he was dead and buried, and never rose again; but his soul was left εις ᾁδου, in the state of the dead, and He saw corruption; for his sepulchre is with us to this day, under that very notion, that it is the sepulchre of David, who died and was there buried; nor is there one syllable mentioned any where of the resurrection of his body, or the return of his soul εξ ᾁδου from the state of the dead."To this the same author adds the following remarkable note: I cannot slip over that passage, Hieros. Chagig. fol. 78: Rab. Jose saith, David died at pentecost, and all Israel bewailed him, and offered their sacrifices the day following. This is a remarkable coincidence; and may be easily applied to him of whom David was a type.

Clarke: Act 2:30

According to the flesh, he would raise up Christ - This whole clause is wanting in ACD, one of the Syriac, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate; and is variously entered in others. Griesbach rejects it from the text, and Professor White says of the words, " certissime delenda ,"they should doubtless be expunged. This is a gloss, says Schoettgen, that has crept into the text, which I prove thus

1.    The Syriac and Vulgate, the most ancient of the versions, have not these words

2.    The passage is consistent enough and intelligible without them

3.    They are superfluous, as the mind of the apostle concerning the resurrection of Christ follows immediately in the succeeding verse

The passage therefore, according to Bp. Pearce, should be read thus: Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath, of the fruit of his loins, to set on his throne; and foreseeing that he (God) would raise up Christ, he spake of the resurrection of Christ, etc. "In this transition, the words which Peter quotes for David’ s are exactly the same with what we read in the psalm above mentioned; and the circumstance of David’ s foreseeing that Christ was to be raised up, and was the person meant, is not represented as a part of the oath; but is only made to be Peter’ s assertion, that David, as a prophet, did foresee it, and meant it."

Clarke: Act 2:31

That his soul was not left in hell - The words ἡ ψυχη αυτου, his soul, are omitted by ABCD, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Vulgate. Griesbach has left them out of the text, and Professor White says again, certissime delenda . The passage may be thus read: "He spake of the resurrection of Christ, that he was not left in hades, neither did his flesh see corruption."For the various readings in this and the preceding verse, see Griesbach.

Clarke: Act 2:32

Whereof we all are witnesses - That is, the whole 120 saw him after he rose from the dead, and were all ready, in the face of persecution and death, to attest this great truth.

Clarke: Act 2:33

By the right hand of God exalted - Raised by omnipotence to the highest dignity in the realms of glory, to sit at the right hand of God, and administer the laws of both worlds

Clarke: Act 2:33

The promise of the Holy Ghost - This was the promise that he had made to them a little before he suffered, as may be seen in Joh 14:16, etc., Joh 16:7, etc., and after he had risen from the dead. Luk 24:49, and which as the apostle says was now shed forth.

Clarke: Act 2:34

David is not ascended - Consequently, he has not sent forth this extraordinary gift, but it comes from his Lord, of whom he said, The Lord said unto my Lord, etc. See the note on these words, Mat 22:44 (note).

Clarke: Act 2:35

Until I make thy foes thy footstool - It was usual with conquerors to put their feet on the necks of vanquished leaders, as emblematical of the state of subjection to which they were reduced, and the total extinction of their power. By quoting these words, Peter shows the Jews, who continued enemies to Christ, that their discomfiture and ruin must necessarily take place, their own king and prophet having predicted this in connection with the other things which had already been so literally and circumstantially fulfilled. This conclusion had the desired effect, when pressed home with the strong application in the following verse.

Clarke: Act 2:36

Both Lord and Christ - Not only the Messiah, but the supreme Governor of all things and all persons, Jews and Gentiles, angels and men. In the preceding discourse, Peter assumes a fact which none would attempt to deny, viz. that Jesus had been lately crucified by them

He then

1.    Proves his resurrection

2.    His ascension

3.    His exaltation to the right hand of God

4.    The effusion of the Holy Spirit, which was the fruit of his glorification, and which had not only been promised by himself, but foretold by their own prophets: in consequence of which

5.    It was indisputably proved that this same Jesus, whom they had crucified, was the promised Messiah; and if so

6.    The Governor of the universe, from whose power and justice they had every thing to dread, as they refused to receive his proffered mercy and kindness.

Clarke: Act 2:37

When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart - This powerful, intelligent, consecutive, and interesting discourse, supported every where by prophecies and corresponding facts, left them without reply and without excuse; and they plainly saw there was no hope for them, but in the mercy of him whom they had rejected and crucified

Clarke: Act 2:37

What shall we do? - How shall we escape those judgments which we now see hanging over our heads?

Clarke: Act 2:38

Peter said unto them, Repent - Μετανοησατε ; Humble yourselves before God, and deeply deplore the sins you have committed; pray earnestly for mercy, and deprecate the displeasure of incensed justice. For a definition of repentance, see on Mat 3:2 (note)

Clarke: Act 2:38

And be baptized every one of you - Take on you the public profession of the religion of Christ, by being baptized in his name; and thus acknowledge yourselves to be his disciples and servants

Clarke: Act 2:38

For the remission of sins - Εις αφεσιν ἁμαρτιων, In reference to the remission or removal of sins: baptism pointing out the purifying influences of the Holy Spirit; and it is in reference to that purification that it is administered, and should in consideration never be separated from it. For baptism itself purifies not the conscience; it only points out the grace by which this is to be done

Clarke: Act 2:38

Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost - If ye faithfully use the sign, ye shall get the substance. Receive the baptism, in reference to the removal of sins, and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost, by whose agency alone the efficacy of the blood of the covenant is applied, and by whose refining power the heart is purified. It was by being baptized in the name of Christ that men took upon themselves the profession of Christianity; and it was in consequence of this that the disciples of Christ were called Christians.

Clarke: Act 2:39

For the promise is unto you - Jews of the land of Judea: not only the fulfillment of the promise which he had lately recited from the prophecy of Joel was made to them, but in this promise was also included the purification from sin, with every gift and grace of the Holy Spirit

Clarke: Act 2:39

To all that are afar off - To the Jews wherever dispersed, and to all the Gentile nations; for, though St. Peter had not as yet a formal knowledge of the calling of the Gentiles, yet, the Spirit of God, by which he spoke, had undoubtedly this in view; and therefore the words are added, even as many as the Lord our God shall call, i.e. all to whom, in the course of his providence and grace, he shall send the preaching of Christ crucified.

Clarke: Act 2:40

Save yourselves from this untoward generation - Separate yourselves from them: be ye saved, σωθητε : the power is present with you; make a proper use of it, and ye shall be delivered from their obstinate unbelief, and the punishment that awaits it in the destruction of them and their city by the Romans.

Clarke: Act 2:41

They that gladly received his word - The word ασμενως, which signifies joyfully, readily, willingly, implies that they approved of the doctrine delivered; that they were glad to hear of this way of salvation; and that they began immediately to act according to its dictates. This last sense is well expressed in a similar phrase by Josephus: when speaking of the young Israelites enticing the Midianitish women to sin, by fair speeches, he says, αἱ δε ασμενως δεξαμεναι τους λογους συνῃεσαν αυτοις, Ant. l. iv. c. 4. Then they who approved of their words consorted with them. The word is however omitted by ABCD, Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Vulgate, the Itala of the Codex Bezae, Clemens, and Chrysostom

Clarke: Act 2:41

Were baptized - That is, in the name of Jesus, Act 2:38, for this was the criterion of a Jew’ s conversion; and when a Jew had received baptism in this name he was excluded from all communication with his countrymen; and no man would have forfeited such privileges but on the fullest and clearest conviction. This baptism was a very powerful means to prevent their apostasy; they had, by receiving baptism in the name of Jesus, renounced Judaism, and all the political advantages connected with it; and they found it indispensably necessary to make the best use of that holy religion which they had received in its stead. Dr. Lightfoot has well remarked, that the Gentiles who received the Christian doctrine were baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost; whereas the Jewish converts, for the reasons already given, were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus

Clarke: Act 2:41

Were added - three thousand souls - Προσετεθησαν, They went over from one party to another. The Greek writers make use of this verb to signify that act by which cities, towns, or provinces changed their masters, and put themselves under another government. So these 3000 persons left the scribes and Pharisees, and put themselves under the teaching of the apostles, professing the Christian doctrine, and acknowledging that Christ was come, and that he who was lately crucified by the Jews was the promised and only Messiah; and in this faith they were baptized

These 3000 were not converted under one discourse, nor in one place, nor by one person. All the apostles preached, some in one language, and some in another; and not in one house - for where was there one at that time that could hold such a multitude of people? For, out of the multitudes that heard, 3000 were converted; and if one in five was converted it must have been a very large proportion. The truth seems to by this: All the apostles preached in different, parts of the city, during the course of that day; and in that day, τῃ ἡμερᾳ εκεινῃ, 3000 converts were the fruits of the conjoint exertions of these holy men. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that the account in this place is the fulfillment of the prophecy in Psa 110:1, etc.: The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand; this refers to the resurrection and ascension of Christ. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, Psa 110:3. This was the day of his power; and while the apostles proclaimed his death, resurrection, and ascension, the people came willingly in, and embraced the doctrines of Christianity.

Clarke: Act 2:42

They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine - They received it, retained it, and acted on its principles

Clarke: Act 2:42

And fellowship - Κοινωνιᾳ, community; meaning association for religious and spiritual purposes, The community of goods cannot be meant; for this is mentioned Act 2:44, Act 2:45, where it is said, they had all things common

Clarke: Act 2:42

And in breaking of bread - Whether this means the holy eucharist, or their common meals, it is difficult to say. The Syriac understands it of the former. Breaking of bread was that act which preceded a feast or meal, and which was performed by the master of the house, when he pronounced the blessing - what we would call grace before meat. See the form on Mat 26:26 (note)

Clarke: Act 2:42

And in prayers - In supplications to God for an increase of grace and life in their own souls; for establishment in the truth which they had received, and for the extension of the kingdom of Christ in the salvation of men. Behold the employment of the primitive and apostolic Church

1.    They were builded up on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the corner stone

2.    They continued steadfastly in that doctrine which they had so evidently received from God

3.    They were separated from the world, and lived in a holy Christian fellowship, strengthening and building up each other in their most holy faith

4.    They were frequent in breaking bread; in remembrance that Jesus Christ died for them

5.    They continued in prayers; knowing that they could be no longer faithful than while they were upheld by their God; and knowing also that they could not expect his grace to support them, unless they humbly and earnestly prayed for its continuance.

Clarke: Act 2:43

And fear came upon every soul - Different MSS. and versions read this clause thus, And Great fear and Trembling came upon every soul in Jerusalem. For several weeks past they had a series of the most astonishing miracles wrought before their eyes; they were puzzled and confounded at the manner in which the apostles preached, who charged them home with the deliberate murder of Jesus Christ, and who attested, in the most positive manner, that he was risen from the dead, and that God had sent down that mighty effusion of the Spirit which they now witnessed as a proof of his resurrection and ascension, and that this very person whom they had crucified was appointed by God to be the Judge of quick and dead. They were in consequences stung with remorse, and were apprehensive of the judgments of God; and the wonders and signs continually wrought by the apostles were at once proofs of the celestial origin of their doctrine and mission, and of their own baseness, perfidy, and wickedness.

Clarke: Act 2:44

And, all that believed - Οἱ πιστευοντες, The believers, i.e. those who conscientiously credited the doctrine concerning the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ, and had, in consequence, received redemption in his blood

Clarke: Act 2:44

Were together - Επι το αυτο . "These words signify either, in one time, Act 3:1; or in one place, Act 2:1; or in one thing. The last of these three senses seems to be the most proper here; for it is not probable that the believers, who were then 3000 in number, Act 2:41, besides the 120 spoken of Act 1:15, were used all to meet at one time, or in one place, in Jerusalem."See Bp. Pearce

Clarke: Act 2:44

And had all things common - Perhaps this has not been well understood. At all the public religious feasts in Jerusalem, there was a sort of community of goods. No man at such times hired houses or beds in Jerusalem; all were lent gratis by the owners: Yoma, fol. 12. Megill. fol. 26. The same may be well supposed of their ovens, cauldrons, tables, spits, and other utensils. Also, provisions of water were made for them at the public expense; Shekalim, cap. 9. See Lightfoot here. Therefore a sort of community of goods was no strange thing at Jerusalem, at such times as these. It appears, however, that this community of goods was carried farther; for we are informed, Act 2:45, that they sold their possessions and their goods, and parted them to all, as every man had need. But, this probably means that, as in consequence of this remarkable outpouring of the Spirit of God; and their conversion, they were detained longer at Jerusalem than they had originally intended, they formed a kind of community for the time being, that none might suffer want on the present occasion; as no doubt the unbelieving Jews, who were mockers, Act 2:13, would treat these new converts with the most marked disapprobation. That an absolute community of goods never obtained in the Church at Jerusalem, unless for a very short time, is evident from the apostolical precept, 1Co 16:1, etc., by which collections were ordered to be made for the poor; but, if there had been a community of goods in the Church, there could have been no ground for such recommendations as these, as there could have been no such distinction as rich and poor, if every one, on entering the Church, gave up all his goods to a common stock. Besides, while this sort of community lasted at Jerusalem, it does not appear to have been imperious upon any; persons might or might not thus dispose of their goods, as we learn front the case of Ananias, Act 5:4. Nor does it appear that what was done at Jerusalem at this time obtained in any other branch of the Christian Church; and in this, and in the fifth chap., where it is mentioned, it is neither praised nor blamed. We may therefore safely infer, it was something that was done at this time, on this occasion, through some local necessity, which the circumstances of the infant Church at Jerusalem might render expedient for that place and on that occasion only.

Clarke: Act 2:46

They, continuing daily with one accord in the temple - They were present at all the times of public worship, and joined together in prayers and praises to God; for it in not to be supposed that they continued to offer any of the sacrifices prescribed by the law

Clarke: Act 2:46

Breaking bread from house to house - This may signify, that select companies, who were contiguous to each other, frequently ate together at their respective lodgings on their return from public worship. But κατ ’ οικον, which we translate from house to house, is repeatedly used by the Greek writers for home, at home, for though they had all things in common, each person lived at his own table. Breaking bread is used to express the act of taking their meals. The bread of the Jews was thin, hard, and dry, and was never cut with the knife as ours is, but was simply broken by the hand

Clarke: Act 2:46

With gladness and singleness of heart - A true picture of genuine Christian fellowship. They ate their bread: they had no severe fasts; the Holy Spirit had done in their souls, by his refining influence, what others vainly expect from bodily austerities. It may be said also, that, if they had no severe fasts, they had no splendid feasts: all was moderation, and all was contentment. They were full of gladness, spiritual joy and happiness; and singleness of heart, every man worthy of the confidence of his neighbor; and all walking by the same rule, and minding the same thing.

Clarke: Act 2:47

Praising God - As the fountain whence they had derived all their spiritual and temporal blessings; seeing him in all things, and magnifying the work of his mercy

Clarke: Act 2:47

Having favor with all the people - Every honest, upright Jew would naturally esteem these for the simplicity, purity, and charity of their lives. The scandal of the cross had not yet commenced; for, though they had put Jesus Christ to death, they had not get entered into a systematic opposition to the doctrines he taught

Clarke: Act 2:47

And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved - Though many approved of the life and manners of these primitive Christians, yet they did not become members of this holy Church; God permitting none to be added to it, but τους σωζομενους, those who were saved from their sins and prejudices. The Church of Christ was made up of saints; sinners ware not permitted to incorporate themselves with it

One MS. and the Armenian version, instead of τους σωζομενους, the saved, have τοις σωζομενοις, to them who were saved; reading the verse thus: And the Lord added daily to those who were saved. He united those who were daily converted under the preaching of the apostles to those who had already been converted. And thus every lost sheep that was found was brought to the flock, that, under the direction of the great Master Shepherd, they might go out and in, and find pasture. The words, to the Church, τῃ εκκλησιᾳ, are omitted by BC, Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate; and several add the words επι το αυτο, at that tine, (which begin the first verse of the next chapter) to the conclusion of this. My old MS. English Bible reads the verse thus: For so the Lord encresed hem that weren maad saaf, eche day, into the same thing . Nearly the same rendering as that in Wiclif. Our translation of τους σωζομενους, such as should be saved is improper and insupportable. The original means simply and solely those who were then saved; those who were redeemed from their sins and baptized into the faith of Jesus Christ. The same as those whom St. Paul addressed, Eph 2:8 : By grace ye are saved, εστε σεσωσμενοι ; or, ye are those who have been saved by grace. So in Tit 3:5 : According to his mercy he saved us, εσωσεν ἡμας, by the washing of regeneration. And in 1Co 1:18, we have the words τοις σωζομενοις, them who are saved, to express those who had received the Christian faith; in opposition to τοις απολλυμενοις, to those who are lost, namely the Jews, who obstinately refused to receive salvation on the terms of the Gospel, the only way in which they could be saved; for it was by embracing the Gospel of Christ that they were put in a state of salvation; and, by the grace it imparted, actually saved from the power, guilt, and dominion of sin. See 1Co 15:2 : I made known unto you, brethren, the Gospel which I preached unto you, which ye have received, and in which ye stand; and By Which Ye Are Saved, δι ’ οὑ και σωζεσθε . Our translation, which indeed existed long before our present authorized version, as may be seen in Cardmarden’ s Bible, 1566, Beck’ s Bible, 1549, and Tindall’ s Testament, printed by Will. Tylle, in 1548, is bad in itself; but it has been rendered worse by the comments put on it, viz. that those whom God adds to the Church shall necessarily and unavoidably be eternally saved; whereas no such thing is hinted by the original text, be the doctrine of the indefectibility of the saints true or false - which shall be examined in its proper place

On that awful subject, the foreknowledge of God, something has already been spoken: see Act 2:23. Though it is a subject which no finite nature can comprehend, yet it is possible so to understand what relates to us in it as to avoid those rocks of presumption and despondency on which multitudes have been shipwrecked. The foreknowledge of God is never spoken of in reference to himself, but in reference to us: in him properly there is neither foreknowledge nor afterknowledge. Omniscience, or the power to know all things, is an attribute of God, and exists in him as omnipotence, or the power to do all things. He can do whatsoever he will; and he does whatsoever is fit or proper to be done. God cannot have foreknowledge, strictly speaking, because this would suppose that there was something coming, in what we call futurity, which had not yet arrived at the presence of the Deity. Neither can he have any afterknowledge, strictly speaking, for this would suppose that something that had taken place, in what we call pretereity, or past time, had now got beyond the presence of the Deity. As God exists in all that can be called eternity, so he is equally every where: nothing can be future to him, because he lives in all futurity; nothing can be past to him, because he equally exists in all past time; futurity and pretereity are relative terms to us; but they can have no relation to that God who dwells in every point of eternity; with whom all that is past, and all that is present, and all that is future to man, exists in one infinite, indivisible, and eternal Now. As God’ s omnipotence implies his power to do all things, so God’ s omniscience implies his power to know all things; but we must take heed that we meddle not with the infinite free agency of this Eternal Being. Though God can do all thinks, he does not all things. Infinite judgment directs the operations of his power, so that though he can, yet he does not do all things, but only such things as are proper to be done. In what is called illimitable space, he can make millions of millions of systems; but he does not see proper to do this. He can destroy the solar system, but he does not do it: he can fashion and order, in endless variety, all the different beings which now exist, whether material, animal, or intellectual; but he does not do this, because he does not see it proper to be done. Therefore it does not follow that, because God can do all things, therefore he must do all things. God is omniscient, and can know all things; but does it follow from this that he must know all things? Is he not as free in the volitions of his wisdom, as he is in the volitions of his power? The contingent as absolute, or the absolute as contingent? God has ordained some things as absolutely certain; these he knows as absolutely certain. He has ordained other things as contingent; these he knows as contingent. It would be absurd to say that he foreknows a thing as only contingent which he has made absolutely certain. And it would be as absurd to say that he foreknows a thing to be absolutely certain which in his own eternal counsel he has made contingent. By absolutely certain, I mean a thing which must be, in that order, time, place, and form in which Divine wisdom has ordained it to be; and that it can be no otherwise than this infinite counsel has ordained. By contingent, I mean such things as the infinite wisdom of God has thought proper to poise on the possibility of being or not being, leaving it to the will of intelligent beings to turn the scale. Or, contingencies are such possibilities, amid the succession of events, as the infinite wisdom of God has left to the will of intelligent beings to determine whether any such event shall take place or not. To deny this would involve the most palpable contradictions, and the most monstrous absurdities. If there be no such things as contingencies in the world, then every thing is fixed and determined by an unalterable decree and purpose of God; and not only all free agency is destroyed, but all agency of every kind, except that of the Creator himself; for on this ground God is the only operator, either in time or eternity: all created beings are only instruments, and do nothing but as impelled and acted upon by this almighty and sole Agent. Consequently, every act is his own; for if he have purposed them all as absolutely certain, having nothing contingent in them, then he has ordained them to be so; and if no contingency, then no free agency, and God alone is the sole actor. Hence the blasphemous, though, from the premises, fair conclusion, that God is the author of all the evil and sin that are in the world; and hence follows that absurdity, that, as God can do nothing that is wrong, Whatever Is, is Right. Sin is no more sin; a vicious human action is no crime, if God have decreed it, and by his foreknowledge and will impelled the creature to act it. On this ground there can be no punishment for delinquencies; for if every thing be done as God has predetermined, and his determinations must necessarily be all right, then neither the instrument nor the agent has done wrong. Thus all vice and virtue, praise and blame, merit and demerit, guilt and innocence, are at once confounded, and all distinctions of this kind confounded with them. Now, allowing the doctrine of the contingency of human actions, (and it must be allowed in order to shun the above absurdities and blasphemies), then we see every intelligent creature accountable for its own works, and for the use it makes of the power with which God has endued it; and, to grant all this consistently, we must also grant that God foresees nothing as absolutely and inevitably certain which he has made contingent; and, because he has designed it to be contingent, therefore he cannot know it as absolutely and inevitably certain. I conclude that God, although omniscient, is not obliged, in consequence of this, to know all that he can know; no more than he is obliged, because he is omnipotent, to do all that he can do

How many, by confounding the self and free agency of God with a sort of continual impulsive necessity, have raised that necessity into an all-commanding and overruling energy, to which God himself is made subject! Very properly did Milton set his damned spirits about such work as this, and has made it a part of their endless punishment: -

Others apart sat on a hill retired

In thoughts more elevate; and reasoned hig

Of providence, foreknowledge, will, and fate

Fixed fate, free-will, foreknowledge absolute

And found no end, in wand’ ring mazes lost

Parad. Lost, b. ii. l. 557

Among some exceptionable expressions, the following are also good thoughts on the flee agency and fall of man: -

- I made him just and right

Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall

Not free, what proof could they have given sincer

Of true allegiance, constant faith or love

When only what they needs must do appeared

Not what they would? What praise could they receive?

Useless and vain, of freedom both despoiled

Made passive, both had served Necessity

Not Me. -

So without least impulse or shadow of fate

Or aught by me immutably foreseen

They trespass, authors to themselves in al

Both what they judge, and what they choose, for s

I formed them free, and free they must remai

Till they enthrall themselves: I else must chang

Their nature, and revoke the high decre

Unchangeable, eternal, which ordaine

Their freedom; they themselves ordained their fall

Ibid, b. iii. l. 98, 103, 120

I shall conclude these observations with a short extract from Mr. Bird’ s Conferences, where, in answer to the objection, "If many things fall out contingently, or as it were by accident, God’ s foreknowledge of them can be but contingent, dependent on man’ s free will,"he observes: "It is one thing to know that a thing will be done necessarily; and another, to know necessarily that a thing will be done. God doth necessarily foreknow all that will be done; but he doth not know that those things which shall be done voluntarily will be done necessarily: he knoweth that they will be done; but he knoweth withal that they might have fallen out otherwise, for aught he had ordered to the contrary. So likewise God knew that Adam would fall; and get he knew that he would not fall necessarily, for it was possible for him not to have fallen. And as touching God’ s preordination going before his prescience as the cause of all events this would be to make God the author of all the sin in the world; his knowledge comprehending that as well as other things. God indeed foreknoweth all things, because they will be done; but things are not (therefore) done, because he foreknoweth them. It is impossible that any man, by his voluntary manner of working, should elude God’ s foresight; but then this foresight doth not necessitate the will, for this were to take it wholly away. For as the knowledge of things present imports no necessity on that which is done, so the foreknowledge of things future lays no necessity on that which shall be; because whosoever knows and sees things, he knows and sees them as they are, and not as they are not; so that God’ s knowledge doth not confound things, but reaches to all events, not only which come to pass, but as they come to pass, whether contingency or necessarily. As, for example, when you see a man walking upon the earth, and at the very same instant the sun shining in the heavens, do you not see the first as voluntary, and the second as natural? And though at the instant you see both done, there is a necessity that they be done, (or else you could not see them at all), yet there was a necessity of one only before they were done, (namely, the sun’ s shining in the heavens), but none at all of the other, (viz. the man’ s walking upon the earth.) The sun could not but shine, as being a natural agent; the man might not have walked, as being a voluntary one."This is a good argument; but I prefer that which states the knowledge of God to be absolutely free, without the contradictions which are mentioned above. "But you deny the omniscience of God."- No, no more than I deny his omnipotence, and you know I do not, though you have asserted the contrary. But take heed how you speak about this infinitely free agent: if you will contradict, take heed that you do not blaspheme. I ask some simple questions on the subject of God’ s knowledge and power: if you know these things better than your neighbor, be thankful, be humble, and pray to God to give you amiable tempers; for the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. May he be merciful to thee and me!

Calvin: Act 2:27

27.Because thou shalt not leave To leave the soul in hell is to suffer the same to be oppressed with destruction. There be two words used in this place, both which do signify the grave amongst the Hebricians. Because שאול , doth signify to require, I suppose it is called סול , because death is insatiable; whence also cometh that translation, Hell hath enlarged her soul. Again, they set open their mouth like hell. And because the latter שחת , is derived and set for corruption, or consumption, that quality is to be considered, as David meant to note the same. Those things which are disputed in this place by divers, concerning the descending of Christ into hell, are in my judgment superfluous; because they are far from the intent and purpose of the prophet. For the word anima, or soul, doth not so much signify the spirit being of an immortal essence as the life itself. For when a man is dead, and lieth in the grave, the grave is said to rule over his life. Whereas the Grecians translate it holy, it is in Hebrew חסת , which doth properly signify meek, or gentle, but Luke did not much regard this, because it doth not much appertain unto the present purpose. Furthermore, gentleness and meekness is so often commended in the faithful, because it behoveth them to imitate and resemble the nature of their Father.

Calvin: Act 2:28

28.Thou hast made known He meaneth, that he was restored from death to life by the grace of God. For in that he was, as it were, a man raised from death to life, he acknowledgeth that it was a great good gift of God. This was in such sort fulfilled in Christ, that there wanted nothing unto perfection. As for the members they have their measure. Therefore Christ was far from corruption, that he may be the first-fruits of those which rise from death, (1Co 15:23.) We shall follow him in our order at length, but being first turned into dust, (1Co 15:42.) That which followeth, that he was filled with gladness, with the countenance of God, agreeth with that: Show us thy face, and we shall be safe. And, again, The light of thy countenance is showed upon us: thou hast put gladness in my heart. For it is only the pleasantness of God’s countenance, which doth not only make us glad, but also quickens us; again, when the same is turned away, or troubled, we must needs faint.

Calvin: Act 2:30

30.Therefore, seeing he was a prophet He showeth, by two reasons, that it is no marvel if David do speak of things that should come to pass long after his time; the former is, because he was a prophet. And we know that things to come, and such as are removed far from the knowledge of men, are revealed unto the prophets. Therefore, it were wickedness to measure their speeches according to the common manner and order which we use in measuring the speeches of other men, forasmuch as they go beyond the long courses of years, having the Spirit for their director. Whereupon they are also called seers; because being placed, as it were, upon an high tower, ¹²¹ they see those things which, by reason of great distance, are hidden from other men. Another reason is, because Christ was promised to him peculiarly. This maxim was so common amongst the Jews, that they had ever now and then the son of David in their mouth, so often as there was any mention made of Christ. They be no such arguments, I confess, as do necessarily prove that this prophecy is to be expounded of Christ; neither was that Peter’s intent and purpose; but first he meant to prevent the contrary objection, whence David had such skill to foretell a thing which was unknown. Therefore he saith, That he knew Christ, both by prophetical revelation, and also by singular promise. Furthermore, this principle was of great (Rom 10:4) force amongst the better-minded sort which Paul setteth down, that Christ is the end of the law. ¹²² No man, therefore, did doubt of this, but that this was the mark whereat all the prophets did aim, to lead the godly unto Christ as it were by the hand. Therefore, what notable or extraordinary thing soever they did utter, the Jews were commonly persuaded that it did agree with Christ. Furthermore, we must note, that Peter doth reason soundly, when he gathered that David was not ignorant of that which was the chiefest point of all revelations.

He had sworn with an oath God swore not only to the end he might make David believe his promise, but also that the thing promised might be had in greater estimation. And to this end, in my judgment, it is here repeated, that the Jews may think with themselves of what great weight the promise was, which God did make so notable (and so famous.) The same admonition is profitable for us also. For we need not to doubt of this, but that the Lord meant to set forth the excellency of the covenant by putting in a solemn oath. In the mean season, this is also a fit remedy for the infirmity of our faith, that the sacred name of God is set forth unto us, ¹²³ that his words may carry the greater credit. These words, “according to the flesh,” do declare that there was some more noble thing in Christ than the flesh. Therefore Christ did so come of the seed of David as he was man, that he doth nevertheless, retain his divinity; and so the distinction between the two natures is plainly expressed; when as Christ is called the Son of God, according to his eternal essence, in like sort as he is called the seed of David according to the flesh.

Calvin: Act 2:32

32.This Jesus After that he had proved by the testimony of David, that it was most requisite that Christ should rise again, he saith, that he and the rest of his fellows were such witnesses as saw him with their eyes after his resurrection. For this text ¹²⁴ will not suffer this word raised up to be drawn into any other sense. Whereupon it followeth that that was fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth which David did foreshow concerning Christ. After that he intreateth of the fruit or effect. For it was requisite for him to declare that first, that Christ is alive. Otherwise it had been an absurd and incredible thing that he should be the author of so great a miracle. Notwithstanding he doth therewithal teach us, that he did not rise for his own sake alone, but that he might make the whole Church partaker of his life, having poured out the Spirit.

Calvin: Act 2:33

33.He being therefore exalted by the right hand of God The right hand is taken in this place for the hand or power, in like sort as it is taken everywhere in the Scripture. For this is his drift, to declare that it was a wonderful work of God, in that he had exalted his Christ (whom men thought to be quite destroyed by death) unto so great glory.

The promise of the Spirit for the Spirit which was promised. For he had oftentimes before promised the Spirit to his apostles. Therefore Peter doth signify, that Christ had obtained power of God the Father to fulfill the same. And he maketh mention of the promise in plain words, to the end the Jews may know that this came not to pass suddenly, but that the words of the prophet were now verified, which went long time before the thing itself.

Furthermore, whereas it is said that he obtained it of the Father, it is to be applied to the person of the Mediator. For both these are truly said, that Christ sent the Spirit from himself and from the Father. He sent him from himself, because he is eternal God; from the Father, because in as much as he is man, he receiveth that of the Father which he giveth us. And Peter speaketh wisely according to the capacity of the ignorant, lest any man should move a question out of season concerning the power of Christ. And surely forasmuch as it is the office of Christ to direct us unto his Father, this is a most apt form of speaking for the use of godliness, that Christ being placed, as it were, in the midst between God and us, doth deliver unto us with his own hand those gifts which he hath received at the hands of his Father. Furthermore, we must note this order that he saith, that the Spirit was sent by Christ after that he was exalted. This agreeth with those sentences:

“The Spirit was not yet given,
because Christ was not yet glorified,”
(Joh 7:39.)

And again,

“Unless I go hence, the Spirit will not come,”
(Joh 16:7.)

Not because the Spirit began then first to be given, wherewith the holy fathers were endued since the beginning of the world; but because God did defer this more plentiful abundance of grace, until such time as he had placed Christ in his princely seat; which is signified by this word poured out, as we saw a little before. For by this means the force and fruit of Christ his death and resurrection is sealed; and we do also thereby know, that we have lost nothing by Christ his departing out of the world; because, though he be absent in body, yet is he present with us after a better sort, to wit, by the grace of his Holy Spirit.

Calvin: Act 2:34

34.For doubtless David Although they might easily gather by the very effect which they saw with their eyes, that the principality was granted and given to Christ, yet to the end his glory may carry the greater credit, he proveth, by David his testimony, that it was so appointed in times past by God, that Christ should be lifted up unto the highest degree of honor. For these words, to “sit at the right hand of God,” import as much as to bear the chief rule, as we shall afterward more at large declare. Yet before he reciteth the prophecy, he saith that it agreeth only to Christ. Therefore, to the end the sense may be more manifest, the sentence must thus run. David pronounceth that it was decreed by God that a king should sit at his right hand. But this doth not appertain unto David, who was never extolled unto so great dignity. Therefore lie speaketh this of Christ. Furthermore, that ought to have seemed no strange thing unto the Jews which was foretold by the oracle of the Holy Ghost. Hereby it appeareth in what sense Peter denieth that David ascended into heaven. He intreateth not in this place of the soul of David, whether it were received into blessed rest, and the heavenly dwelling or no; but the ascending into heaven comprehendeth under it those things which Paul teacheth in the Epistle to the Ephesians, (Eph 4:9), where he placeth Christ above all heavens, that he may fulfill all things. Wherefore the disputation concerning the estate of the dead is altogether superfluous in this place. For Peter goeth about to prove no other thing but this, that the prophecy concerning the sitting at the right hand of God was not fulfilled in David, and that, therefore, the truth thereof must be sought elsewhere. And forasmuch as it can be found nowhere else save only in Jesus Christ, it resteth that the Jews ¹²⁵ do know that that is showed to them in Christ which was foretold them so long before. That is true, indeed, that David reigned, God being the author hereof, and, in some respect, he was God’s vicegerent; yet not so that he might be above all creatures. Wherefore, this sitting agreeth to none, unless he excel and be above all the whole world.

The Lord said unto my Lord This is the most lawful manner of ruling, when as the king (or by what other title soever he be called) doth know that he is ordained of God, therefore David pronounceth that the commandment to reign was given unto Christ by name, (Psa 110:1.) As if he should say, He took not the honor to himself rashly, but did only obey God when he commanded him, (Heb 5:5.) Now must we see whether Peter’s reason be sound enough or no. He gathereth that the words concern Christ, because the sitting at the right hand of God doth not agree to David. It seemeth that this may be refuted, because David did reign by the peculiar commandment, name, and help of God; which is to sit at the right hand of God. But Peter taketh that for a thing which all men grant, which is true, and which I have already touched, that a greater and more royal government is here spoken of than that which David did enjoy. For howsoever he was God’s vicegerent and did, as it were, represent his person in reigning, yet is this power far inferior to that, to sit even at the right side of God. For this is attributed to Christ, because he is placed above all principality, and above every name that is named, both in this world, and in the world to come, (Eph 1:21.) Seeing that David is far inferior to the angels, he doth possess no such place that he should be counted next to God. For he must ascend far above all heavens, that he may come to the right hand of God. Wherefore no man is said to sit at it, rightly and properly, save only he which doth surpass all creatures in the degree of honor. As for him which is resident amongst the creatures, although he be reckoned in the order of angels, yet is he far from that highness. Again, we must not seek the right hand of God amongst the creatures; but it doth also surpass all heavenly principalities.

Furthermore, there is great weight even in the sentence itself. The king is commanded to bear the chiefest rule, until God have put all his enemies under his feet. Surely, although I grant that; he name of such an honorable sitting may be applied unto earthly lordship: yet do I deny that David did reign until such time as all his enemies were subdued. For we do hereby gather that the kingdom of Christ is eternal. But the kingdom of David was not only temporal, but also frail, and of a small continuance.

Moreover, when David died, he left many enemies alive here and there he got many notable victories, but he was far from subduing all his enemies. He made many of those people which were round about him tributaries to him; some did he put to flight and destroyed; but what is all this unto all? Finally, we may prove by the whole text of the Psalm, that there can nothing else be understood save only the kingdom of Christ. That I may pass over other things: that which is here spoken touching the eternal priesthood is too far disagreeing from David’s person. I know that the Jews do prattle, that kings’ sons are called elsewhere cohenim. But he intreateth here of the priesthood as it is ascribed by Moses to the king Melchizedek. And there is established by a solemn oath a certain new kind of priesthood. And, therefore, we must not here imagine any common or ordinary thing. But it had been wickedness for David to thrust himself into any part of the priest’s office. How should he then be called cohen, greater than Aaron, and consecrated of God for ever? But because I do not intend at this present to expound the whole Psalm, let this reason suffice which Peter bringeth: That he is made Lord of heaven and earth, which sitteth at the right hand of God. As touching the second member of the verse, read those things which I have noted upon the fifteenth chapter (1Co 15:25) of the former Epistle to the Corinthians, concerning the putting of his enemies under his feet.

Calvin: Act 2:36

36.Therefore, let all the house of Israel know The house of Israel did confess that that Christ should come which was promised; yet did they not know Who it was. Therefore, Peter concludeth, that Jesus: whom they had so spitefully handled, yea, whose name they did so greatly detest: is he whom they ought to acknowledge to be their Lord, and whom they ought to reverence. For, (saith he,) God hath made him Lord and Christ; that is, you must look for none other than him whom God hath made and given. Furthermore, he saith, That he was made, because God the Father gave him this honor. He joineth the title Lord with the word Christ, because it was a common thing among the Jews, that the Redeemer should be anointed upon this condition, that he might be the Head of the Church, and that the chiefest power over all things might be given him. He speaketh unto the whole house of Israel; as if he should say, Whosoever will be reckoned among the sons of Jacob, and do also look for the promise, let them know for a surety, that this is he and none other. He useth the word house, because God had separated that name and family from all other people. And he saith ασφαλως, or for a surety, not only that they may repose their sure confidence and trust in Christ, but that he may take away all occasion of doubting from those which do oftentimes willingly doubt even of matters which are certain and sure. In the end of his oration he upbraideth unto them again, that they did crucify him, that being touched with greater grief of conscience, they may desire remedy.

And now, forasmuch as they know that Jesus is the Anointed of the Lord, the governor of the Church, and the giver of the Holy Ghost, the accusation hath so much the more force. For the putting of him to death was not only full of cruelty and wickedness, but also a testimony of outrageous disloyalty against God, of sacrilege and unthankfulness, and, finally, of apostasy. But it was requisite that they should be so wounded, lest they should have been slow to seek for medicine. And yet, notwithstanding, they did not crucify him with their own hands; but this is more than sufficient to make them guilty, in that they desired to have him put to death. And we also are accused by this same voice, if we crucify him in ourselves, being already glorified in heaven, making a mock of him, as saith the Apostle, (Heb 6:6.)

Calvin: Act 2:37

37.They were pricked in heart Luke doth now declare the fruit of the sermon, to the end we may know that the power of the Holy Ghost was not only showed forth in the diversity of tongues, but also in their hearts which heard. And he noteth a double fruit; first, that they were touched with the feeling of sorrow; and, secondly, that they were obedient to Peter’s counsel. This is the beginning of repentance, this is the entrance unto godliness, to be sorry for our sins, and to be wounded with the feeling of our miseries. For so long as men are careless, they cannot take such heed unto doctrine as they ought. And for this cause the word of God is compared to a sword, (Heb 4:12,) because it doth mortify our flesh, that we may be offered to God for a sacrifice. But there must be added unto this pricking in heart readiness to obey. Cain and Judas were pricked in heart, but despair did keep them back from submitting themselves unto God, (Gen 4:13; Mat 27:3.) For the mind being oppressed with horror, can do nothing else but flee from God. And surely when David affirmeth that a contrite spirit and an humble heart is a sacrifice acceptable to God, he speaketh of voluntary pricking; forasmuch as there is fretting and fuming mixed with the prickings of the wicked. Therefore, we must take a good heart to us, and lift up our mind with this hope of salvation, that we may be ready to addict and give over ourselves unto God, and to follow whatsoever he shall command. We see many oftentimes pricked, who, notwithstanding, do fret and murmur, or else forwardly strive and struggle, and so, consequently, go furiously mad. Yea, this is the cause why they go mad, because they feel such prickings against their will. Those men, therefore, are profitably pricked alone who are willingly sorrowful, and do also seek some remedy at God’s hands.

Calvin: Act 2:38

38.Peter said Hereby we see that those do never go away empty which ask at the mouth of the Lord, and do offer themselves unto him to be ruled and taught; for that promise must needs be true, Knock, and it shall be opened unto you, (Mat 7:7.) Therefore, whosoever shall be rightly prepared to learn, the Lord will not suffer his godly desire to be in vain; for he is a most faithful master, so that he hath scholars which are apt to be taught and studious. Wherefore, there is no cause why he should fear, lest he suffer us to be destitute of sound counsel, if we be attentive and ready to hear him, and do not refuse to embrace whatsoever he shall teach us. And let us suffer ourselves to be governed by the counsel and authority of those men whom he offereth unto us to teach us, for this ready obedience cometh thence so suddenly in those which addict themselves unto the apostles, because they are persuaded that they are sent of God, to show them the way of salvation.

Repent There is greater force in the Greek word, for it doth signify the conversion of the mind, that the whole man may be renewed and made another man, which thing must be diligently noted, because this doctrine was miserably corrupted in the time of Popery; for they translated the name of repentance almost unto certain external rites. They babble somewhat, indeed, about the reigned contrition of the heart; but they touch that part very slightly, and they stand principally upon the external exercises of the body, which were little worth; yea, though there were in them no corruption; but they urge nothing else in a manner but reigned trifles, wherewith men are wearied in vain. Wherefore, let us know that this is the true repentance, when a man is renewed in the spirit of his mind, as Paul teacheth, (Rom 12:2.) Neither need we to doubt of this; but that Peter did preach plainly of the force and nature of repentance; but Luke doth only touch the chief points, and doth not reckon up the words of the oration which he made. We must, therefore, know thus much, that Peter did at the first exhort the Jews unto repentance; and that done, he lifted them up with hope of pardon; for he promised them forgiveness of sins, which two things are the two parts of the gospel, as we know full well; and, therefore, when Christ will briefly teach what the doctrine of the gospel doth contain, he saith, that repentance and remission of sins (Luk 24:47) must be preached in his name. Furthermore, because we are reconciled unto God only by the intercession of Christ’s death, neither are our sins otherwise purged, ¹²⁶ and done away, save only by his blood, therefore, Peter calleth us back unto him by name. He putteth baptism in the fourth place, as the seal whereby the promise of grace is confirmed.

Wherefore, we have in these few words almost the whole sum of Christianity, namely, how a man renouncing himself and taking his farewell of the world, may addict himself wholly to God; secondly, How he may be delivered by free forgiveness of sins, and so adopted into the number of the children of God. And forasmuch as we can obtain none of all these things without Christ, the name of Christ is therewithal set forth unto us, as the only foundation of faith and repentance. And we must also note this, that we do so begin repentance when we are turned unto God, that we must prosecute the same during our life; therefore, this sermon must continually sound in the Church, repent, (Mar 1:15;) not that those men may begin the same, who will be counted faithful, and have a place already in the Church; but that they may go forward in the same; although many do usurp the name of faithful men, which had never any beginning of repentance. Wherefore, we must observe this order in teaching, that those which do yet live unto the world and the flesh may begin to crucify the old man, that they may rise unto newness of life, and that those who are already entered the course of repentance may continually go forward towards the mark. Furthermore, because the inward conversion of the heart ought to bring forth fruits in the life, repentance cannot be rightly taught unless works be required, not those frivolous works which are only in estimation amongst the Papists, but such as are sound testimonies of innocence and holiness.

Be baptized every one of you Although in the text and order of the words, baptism doth here go before remission of sins, yet doth it follow it in order, because it is nothing else but a sealing of those good things which we have by Christ that they may be established in our consciences; therefore, after that Peter had intreated of repentance, he calleth the Jews unto the hope of grace and salvation; and, therefore, Luke well afterwards, in Paul’s sermon, joineth faith and repentance together in the same sense, wherein he putteth forgiveness of sins in this place, and that for good considerations; for the hope of salvation consisteth in the free imputation of righteousness; and we are counted just, freely before God, when he forgiveth us our sins. And as I said before, that the doctrine of repentance hath a daily use in the Church so must we think of the forgiveness of sins, that the same is continually offered unto us; and surely it is no less necessary for us during the whole course of our life, than at our first entrance into the Church, so that it should profit us nothing to be once received into favor by God, unless this embassage should have a continual course; be-reconciled unto God, because

“he which knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might be the righteousness of God in him,”
(2Co 5:20.)

Moreover, the Papists do so corrupt this other part of the gospel, that they quite exclude the remission of sins, which was to be obtained by Christ. They confess their sins are freely forgiven in baptism, but they will have them redeemed with satisfactions after baptism; and although they mix the grace of Christ together therewithal, yet because they inwrap the same in men’s merits, they do by this means overthrow the whole doctrine of the gospel; for, first, they take from men’s consciences the certainty of faith; that done, forasmuch as they part the forgiveness of sins between the death of Christ and our satisfactions, they do altogether deprive us of Christ’s benefit. For Christ doth not reconcile us unto God in part, but wholly, neither can we obtain remission of sins by him, unless it be whole and perfect. But the Papists are much deceived therein, who restrain baptism unto the nativity and former life, as if the signification and force thereof did not reach even unto death.

Let us know, therefore, that forgiveness of sins is grounded in Christ alone, and that we must not think upon any other satisfaction ¹²⁷ save only that which he hath performed by the sacrifice of his death. And for this cause, as we have already said, doth Peter express his name, whereby he doth signify unto us, that none of all these things can be rightly taught, unless Christ be set in the midst, to the end the effect of this doctrine may be sought in him. That needeth no long exposition where he commandeth them to be baptized for the remission of sins; for although God hath once reconciled men unto himself in Christ” by not imputing unto them their sins,” (2Co 5:19,) and doth now imprint in our hearts the faith thereof by his Spirit; yet, notwithstanding, because baptism is the seal whereby he doth confirm unto us this benefit, and so, consequently, the earnest and pledge of our adoption, it is worthily said to be given us for the remission of sins. For because we receive Christ’s gifts by faith, and baptism is a help to confirm and increase our faith, remission of sins, which is an effect of faith, is annexed unto it as unto the inferior mean. Furthermore, we must not fetch the definition of baptism from this place, because Peter doth only touch a part thereof. Our old man is crucified by baptism, as Paul teacheth, that we may rise unto newness of life, (Rom 6:4.) And, again, we put on Christ himself, (1Co 12:0.) and the Scripture teacheth every where, that it is also a sign and token of repentance, (Gal 3:27.) But because Peter doth not intreat in thin place openly of the whole nature of baptism, but speaking of the forgiveness of sins, doth, by the way, declare that the confirmation thereof is in baptism, there doth no inconvenience follow, if ye do omit the other part. ¹²⁸

In the name of Christ Although baptism be no vain figure, but a true and effectual testimony; notwithstanding, lest any man attribute that unto the element of water which is there offered, the name of Christ is plainly expressed, to the end we may know that it shall be a profitable sign for us then, if we seek the force and effect thereof in Christ, and know that we are, therefore, washed in baptism, because the blood of Christ is our washing; and we do also hereby gather, that Christ is, the mark and end whereunto baptism directeth us; wherefore, every one profiteth so much in baptism as he learneth to look unto Christ. But here ariseth a question, Whether it were lawful for Peter to change the form prescribed by Christ? The Papists do think, at least feign so, and thence do they take a color of liberty to change or abrogate the institutions of Christ. They confess that nothing ought to be changed, as touching the substance, but they will have the Church to have liberty to change whatsoever it will in the form. But this argument may easily be answered. For we must first know that Christ did not indite and rehearse unto his apostles magical words for enchanting, as the Papists do dream, but he did, in few words, comprehend the sum of the mystery. Again, I deny that Peter doth speak in this place of the form of baptism; but he doth simply declare that the whole strength ¹²⁹ of baptism is contained in Christ; although Christ cannot be laid hold on by faith without the Father by whom he was given us, and the Spirit by the which he reneweth and sanctifieth us. The answer consisteth wholly in this, that he intreateth not in this place of the certain form of baptizing, but the faithful are called back unto Christ, in whom alone we have whatsoever baptism doth prefigure unto us; for we are both made clean by his blood, and also we enter into a new life by the benefit of his death and resurrection.

Ye shall receive the gift of the Spirit Because they were touched with wondering when they saw the apostles suddenly begin to speak with strange tongues, Peter saith that they shall be partakers of the same gift if they will pass over unto Christ. Remission of sins and newness of life were the principal things, and this was, as it were, an addition, that Christ should show forth unto them his power by some visible gift. Neither ought this place to be understood of the grace of sanctification, which is given generally to all the godly. Therefore he promiseth them the gift of the Spirit, whereof they saw a pattern in the diversity of tongues. Therefore this doth not properly appertain unto us. For because Christ meant to set forth the beginning of his kingdom with those miracles, they lasted but for a time; yet because the visible graces which the Lord did distribute to his did shoe, as it were in a glass, that Christ was the giver of the Spirit, therefore, that which Peter saith doth in some respect appertain unto all the whole Church: ye shall receive the gift of the Spirit. For although we do not receive it, that we may speak with tongues, that we may be prophets, that we may cure the sick, that we may work miracles; yet is it given us for a better use, that we may believe with the heart unto righteousness, that our tongues may be framed unto true confession, (Rom 10:10,) that we may pass from death to life, (Joh 5:24) that we, which are poor and empty, may be made rich, that we may withstand Satan and the world stoutly. Therefore, the grace of the Spirit shall always be annexed unto baptism, unless the let be in ourselves.

Calvin: Act 2:39

39.For the promise appertaineth unto you It was requisite that this should be expressly added, that the Jews might certainly think and persuade themselves that the grace of Christ did belong as well to them as to the apostles. And Peter proveth it thus, because the promise of God was made unto them. For we must always look unto this, because [that] we cannot otherwise know the will of God save only by his word. But it is not sufficient to have the general word, unless we know that the same is appointed for us. Therefore Peter saith, that those benefits which they see in him and his fellows in office were in times past promised to the Jews; because this is required necessarily for the certainty of faith, that every one be fully persuaded of this, that he is comprehended in the number of those unto whom God speaketh. Finally, this is the rule of a true faith, when I am thus persuaded that salvation is mine, because that promise appertaineth unto me which offereth the same. And hereby we have also a greater confirmation, when as the promise is extended unto those who were before afar off. For God had made the covenant with the Jews, (Exo 4:22.) If the force and fruit thereof come also unto the Gentiles, there is no cause why the Jews should doubt of themselves, but that they shall find the promise of God firm and stable.

And we must note these three degrees, that the promise was first made to the Jews, and then to their children, and last of all, that it is also to be imparted to the Gentiles. We know the reason why the Jews are preferred before other people; for they are, as it were, the first begotten in God’s family, yea, they were then separated from other people by a singular privilege. Therefore Peter observeth a good order, when he giveth the Jews the pre-eminence. Whereas he adjoineth their children unto them, it dependeth upon the words of the promise: I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed after thee, (Gen 17:7,) where God doth reckon the children with the fathers in the grace of adoption.

This place, therefore, doth abundantly refute the manifest error of the Anabaptists, which will not have infants, which are the children of the faithful, to be baptized, as if they were not members of the Church. They espy a starting hole in the allegorical sense, ¹³⁰ and they expound it thus, that by children are meant those which are spiritually begotten. But this gross impudency doth nothing help them. It is plain and evident that Peter spoke thus because God did adopt one nation peculiarly. And circumcision did declare that the right of adoption was common even unto infants. Therefore, even as God made his covenant with Isaac, being as yet unborn, because he was the seed of Abraham, so Peter teacheth, that all the children of the Jews are contained in the same covenant, because this promise is always in force, I will be the God of your seed.

And to those which are afar off The Gentiles are named in the last place, which were before strangers. For those which refer it unto those Jews which were exiled afar off, (and driven) into far countries, they are greatly deceived. For he speaketh not in this place of the distance of place; but he noteth a difference between the Jews and the Gentiles, that they were first joined to God by reason of the covenant, and so, consequently, became of his family or household; but the Gentiles were banished from his kingdom. Paul useth the same speech in the second chapter to Ephesians, (Eph 2:11,) that the Gentiles, which were strangers from the promises, are now drawn near, through Jesus Christ, unto God. Because that Christ (the wall of separation being taken away) hath reconciled both (the Jews and Gentiles) unto the Father, and coming, he hath preached peace unto those which were nigh at hand, and which were afar off. Now we understand Peter’s meaning. For to the end he may amplify the grace of Christ, he doth so offer the same unto the Jews, that he saith the Gentiles are also partakers thereof. And therefore he useth this word call, as if he should say: Like as God hath gathered you together into one peculiar people heretofore by his voice, so the same voice shall sound everywhere, that those which are afar off may come and join themselves unto you, when as they shall be called by a new proclamation.

Calvin: Act 2:40

40.And with many Although in these things which we have had hitherto, Luke did not recite the words of St Peter, but did only briefly touch the chief points; notwithstanding he telleth us again in this place, that Peter did not use doctrine only, but did add the pricks of exhortations. And he expresseth plainly that tie stood much ¹³¹ hereupon. Whereas he saith, that he did exhort and beseech, he noteth therein his earnestness. For it was not so easy a matter for them by and by ¹³² to take their leave of those errors wherewith they were of late infected, and to shake off the government of the priests whereunto they were accustomed. Therefore it stood him upon to pull them violently out of this mire. The sum was this, that they should beware of that froward generation. For they could not be Christ’s unless they would depart from his professed enemies. The priests and scribes were then in great authority, and forasmuch as they did cover themselves under the visor [mask] of the Church, they did deceive the simple, this did hinder and keep back a great many from coming to Christ. Also some might waver, and other some might fall away from the right faith. Therefore Peter plainly declareth that they are a froward generation, howsoever they may boast of the title of the Church. For which cause he commandeth his hearers to separate themselves from them, lest they entangle themselves in their wicked and pestiferous fellowship. Whereas he saith, Be ye saved, he signifieth unto them that they shall surely perish if they couple themselves with such a plague. And surely experience doth teach us, how miserably those men are tossed to and fro who cannot discern the voice of their pastor from the voice of other men; ¹³³ and again, what an hindrance softness and sluggishness is to a great many, whilst they desire to stand in a doubt. ¹³⁴ Therefore he commandeth them to depart from the wicked if they will be saved. And this point of doctrine is not to be neglected. For it were not sufficient to have Christ set before us, unless we were also taught to flee those things which do lead us away from him. And it is the duty of a good shepherd to defend his sheep from the wolves. So at this day, to the end we may keep the people in the sincere doctrine of the gospel, we are ever now and then enforced to show and testify how much Papistry differeth from Christianity, and what a hurtful plague it is to be yoked with the unfaithful enemies of Christ. Neither ought Peter to be accused of railing, because he calleth the reverend 6tthers, who had the government of the Church ¹³⁵ in their hands at that day, a froward generation For those dangers which may draw the soul unto destruction are to be showed by their names. For men will not beware of poison, unless they know that it is poison.

Calvin: Act 2:41

41.They, therefore, which willingly Luke showeth more plainly how fruitful this one sermon which Peter made was: to wit, that it gained unto Christ about three thousand men. And therewithal he declareth the nature and force of faith when he saith, that with a prompt and ready ¹³⁶ mind they embraced his word. Therefore, faith must begin with this readiness and willing desire to obey. And because many do show themselves at the first very willing, who afterward have in themselves no constancy or continuance, lest we should think that it was some sudden pang ¹³⁷ which by and by fell away, Luke doth also afterward commend their constancy, who (as he said) did willingly embrace this word of the apostles, showing that they were joined unto the disciples, or that they were engrafted into the same body, and that they continued in their doctrine. Therefore we must neither be slow to obey, nor yet swift to leap back; but we must stick fast, and stand stoutly to that doctrine which we did forthwith (without any tarriance [delay]) embrace. Furthermore, this example ought to make us not a little ashamed. For whereas there was a great multitude converted unto Christ with one sermon, an hundred sermons can scarce move a few of us; and whereas Luke saith that they continued, there is scarce one amongst ten that doth show even a mean desire to profit and go forward, yea, rather, the more part doth soon loathe our doctrine. Woe be, therefore, to the sluggishness and lightness of the world!

Calvin: Act 2:42

42.In their doctrine Luke doth not only commend in them the constancy of faith or of godliness, but he saith, also, that they did constantly give themselves to those exercises which serve to the confirmation of faith; to wit, that they studied continually to profit by hearing the apostles; that they gave themselves much to prayer; that they did use fellowship and breaking of bread very much.

As touching prayer and doctrine the sense is plain. Communication or fellowship, and breaking of bread, may be taken diversely. Some think that breaking of bread doth signify the Lord’s Supper; other some do think that it signifieth alms; other some that the faithful did banquet together ¹³⁸ among themselves. Some do think that κοινωνια, doth signify the celebrating of the Holy Supper; but I do rather agree to those others who think that the same is meant by the breaking of bread. For κοινωνια, unless it have somewhat added unto it, is never found in this sense; therefore, I do rather refer it unto mutual society and fellowship, unto alms, and unto other duties of brotherly fellowship. And my reason why I would rather have breaking of bread to be understood of the Lord’s Supper in this place is this, because Luke doth reckon up those things wherein the public estate of the Church is contained. Yea, he expresseth in this place four marks whereby the true and natural face of the Church may be judged. Do we then seek the true Church of Christ? The image thereof is lively depainted and set forth ¹³⁹ unto us in this place. And he beginneth with doctrine which is, as it were, the soul of the Church. Neither doth he name all manner of doctrine, but the doctrine of the apostles, that is, that which the Son of God had delivered by their hands. Therefore, wheresoever the pure voice of the gospel doth sound, where men continue in the profession thereof, where they exercise themselves in hearing the same ordinarily that they may profit, without all doubt there is the Church.

Hereby we may easily gather how frivolous the boasting of the Papists is, whilst that they carelessly ¹⁴⁰ thunder out with fall mouth the name of the Church; whereas, notwithstanding, they have most filthily corrupted the doctrine of the apostles. For if it be duly examined, we shall find no sound part at all; and in most points they do as much dissent from the same, and have as little agreement therewith as light with darkness. The rule of worshipping God, which ought to be fetched out of the pure Word of God alone, is only made and patched together ¹⁴¹ amongst the Papists, of the superstitious inventions of men. They have translated unto the merits of works the hope of salvation, which ought to have rested in Christ alone. The invocation of God is altogether polluted with innumerable profane dotings of men. Finally, whatsoever is heard amongst them, it is either a deforming of the apostles’ doctrine, or else a clear overthrowing (and destroying) of the same. Therefore, we may as easily refute the foolish arrogancy of the Papists, as they can cloak their dealings with the title of the Church. For this shall be the state, ¹⁴² whether they have retained the purity of doctrine, from which they are as far as hell is from heaven. But they are wise enough in that point, because they will have no controversy moved about doctrine. But we, as I have said, may freely contemn that vain visor, [mask,] forasmuch as the Spirit of God doth pronounce that the Church is principally to be (esteemed and) discerned by this mark, if the simplicity or purity of the doctrine delivered by the apostles do flourish (and be of force) in the same.

In fellowship This member and the last do flow from the first, as fruits or effects. For doctrine is the bond of brotherly fellowship amongst us, and doth also set open unto us the gate unto God, that we may call upon him. And the Supper is added unto doctrine instead of a confirmation. Wherefore, Luke doth not in vain reckon up these four things, when as he will describe unto us the well-ordered state of the Church. And we must endeavor to keep and observe this order, if we will be truly judged to be the Church before God and the angels, and not only to make boast of the name ¹⁴³ thereof amongst men. It is certain that he speaketh of public prayer. And for this cause it is not sufficient for men to make their prayers at home by themselves, unless they meet altogether to pray; wherein consisteth also the profession of faith.

Calvin: Act 2:43

43.And there came He signifieth unto us that the show and sight of the Church was such, that it made others afraid which did not consent unto [its] doctrine; and that was done for the preserving and furthering of the Church. When there ariseth any seen all men set themselves stoutly against the same; and as novelty is odious, the Jews would never have suffered the Church of Christ to stand one minute of an hour, ¹⁴⁴ unless the Lord had restrained them with fear as with a bridle. Furthermore, Luke noteth the manner of fear, that it was no such fear as bringeth men unto the obedience of Christ, but such as causeth men to stand in a doubt, and so, consequently, doth, as it were, so bind them hand and foot, ¹⁴⁵ that they dare not hinder the Lord’s work. Like as there be some at this day who will willingly be ignorant of the gospel; or, at least, are so holden ¹⁴⁶ with the cares of this world, that they cannot thoroughly join themselves unto Christ; and yet they are not so hard-hearted but that they confess that the truth is on our side; and, therefore, they rest, as it were, in the middle way, neither do they favor the cruelty of the wicked, because they are afraid to strive against God. And whereas he saith, Every soul, he speaketh thus by synecdoche. For it is certain that many did contemn the hand of God, and that other some were stricken with no great fear, but that they did furiously rage together against the Church. ¹⁴⁷ But Luke’s meaning was this, that there appeared such power of God in the Church, that the people for the most part had not one word to say. ¹⁴⁸

And many wonders This member serveth also to the showing of the cause. For the miracles served to make them afraid, together with other works of God, although this was not the only reason, but one of many, why they were afraid to set themselves against God, who was on that side, as they did gather by the miracles; whence we gather that they are not only profitable for this to bring men to God, ¹⁴⁹ but also to make the wicked somewhat more gentle, and that they may tame their furiousness. Pharaoh was a man of desperate stubbornness, (Exo 8:8, etc. 19,) and yet we see how miracles do sometimes pierce his obstinate heart. He forgetteth them by and by; but when the hand of God is heavy upon him, he is compelled through fear to yield. To be brief, Luke teacheth that the Jews were by this means kept back, that the Church, which might easily have been destroyed, might have got up her head. ¹⁵⁰ Which thing we have oftentimes tried ¹⁵¹ even in our time. And he doth not only declare that they were bridled with fear, lest they should be so bold as to attempt so much as they lusted to do hurt to the Church, but that they were also humbled with reverence to the glory of the gospel.

Calvin: Act 2:44

44.And all Whereas I have translated it joined together, it is word for word in St Luke, Into the same, or into one, which may be expounded of the place; as if he should have said that they were wont to dwell together in one place. Notwithstanding, I had rather understand it of their consent (and agreement;) as he will say in the fourth chapter, “That they had one heart,” (Act 4:32.) And so he goeth forward orderly, when, as he beginneth with their mind, he addeth afterward their bountifulness, as a fruit proceeding thence. Therefore, he giveth us to understand that they were rightly joined together with brotherly love amongst themselves, and that they did indeed declare the same, because the rich men did sell their goods that they might help the poor. And this is a singular example of love, and therefore doth Luke record the same, to the end we may know that we must relieve the poverty of our brethren with our plenty.

But this place hath need of a sound exposition, because of fantastical [fanatical] spirits, which do feign a commonalty or participation together of goods, whereby all policy or civil government is taken away; as in this age the Anabaptists have raged, because they thought there was no Church unless all men’s goods were put and gathered together, as it were, in one heap, that they might all one with another take thereof. Wherefore, we must in this point beware of two extremes. For many, under color of policy, do keep close and conceal whatsoever they have; they defraud the poor, and they think that they are twice righteous, so they take away no other men’s goods. Other some are carried into the contrary error, because they would have all things confused. But what doth Luke? Surely he noteth another order, when he saith that there was choice made in the distribution. If any man object that no man had any thing which was his own, seeing all things were common, we may easily answer. For this community or participation together must be restrained unto the circumstance which ensueth immediately; to wit, that the poor might be relieved as every man had need. We know the old proverb, “All things are common amongst friends.” When as the scholars of Pythagoras said thus, they did not deny but that every man might govern his own house privately, neither did they intend to make their own wives common; so this having of things common, whereof Luke speaketh, and which he commendeth, doth not take away household government; which thing shall better appear by the fourth chapter, whereas he nameth two alone which sold their possessions of so many thousands. Whence we gather that which I said even now, that they brought forth and made common their goods in no other respect, save only that they might relieve the present necessity. And the impudency of the monks was ridiculous, who did profess that they did observe the apostles’ rule, because they call nothing their own; and yet, nevertheless, they neither sell any thing, neither yet do they pass for any man’s poverty; ¹⁵² but they stuff their idle bellies with the blood of the poor, neither do they regard any other thing in their having of things common, save only that they may be well filled and daintily, although all the whole world be hungry. Wherein, then, are they like to the first disciples, with whom they will be thought to be able to compare? ¹⁵³

Calvin: Act 2:46

46.Continuing in the temple We must note that they did frequent the temple for this cause, because there was more opportunity and occasion offered there to further the gospel. Neither were they drawn with the holiness of the place, seeing they knew that the shadows of the law were ceased; neither meant they to draw others by their example to have the temple in any such reverence; ¹⁵⁴ but because there was there great concourse of people, who having laid aside their private cares, wherewith they had been drawn away elsewhere, ¹⁵⁵ did seek the Lord; they were continually in the temple, that they might gain such unto Christ. There might be another reason which might induce them hereunto, that they might have a mutual conference and imparting of doctrine amongst themselves, which they could not have done so conveniently in a private house, especially seeing they were so, many.

Breaking bread from house to house Luke signifieth unto us, that they did not only show some token of true godliness publicly, but that the course and tenor of their private life was alone in that respect. For whereas some do think that in this place, by breaking of bread is meant the Holy Supper, it seemeth to me that Luke meant no such thing. He signifieth, therefore, unto us, that they used to eat together, and that thriftily. ¹⁵⁶ For those which make sumptuous banquets do not eat their meat together so familiarly. Again, Luke addeth, in singleness of heart; which is also a token of temperance. In sum, his meaning is to declare, that their manner of living was brotherly and sober. Some do join simplicity and gladness with the praise of God; and both texts may well be allowed. ¹⁵⁷ But because there can be no singleness of heart in praising God, unless the stone be also in all parts of the life, therefore it is certain, that there is mention made thereof in this sense, that the faithful did always use the same in all places. ¹⁵⁸ And we must also note the circumstance of time, that, being environed and beset with many dangers, they were merry and joyful. The knowledge of God’s love toward us, and the hope of his protection, do bring us this goodness with them, that we praise God with quiet minds, whatsoever the world doth threaten. And as Luke spoke a little before of the public estate of the Church, so he declareth now what form and manner of life the faithful did use; that we may learn by their example a thrifty fellowship in our manner of living, and in all our whole life to embrace singleness, to enjoy the spiritual joy, and to exercise ourselves in the praises of God. Furthermore, the singleness of heart reacheth far; but if you join it in this place with breaking of bread, it shall signify as much as sincere love, where one man dealeth plainly with another, neither doth any man craftily hunt after his own profit. Yet had I rather set the same against that carefulness, wherewith worldly men ¹⁵⁹ do too much torment themselves. For when as we do not cast our care upon the Lord, this reward hangeth over our heads, that we tremble and quake even when we take our rest.

Calvin: Act 2:47

47.Having favor This is the fruit of an innocent life, to find favor even amongst strangers. And yet we need not to doubt of this, but that they were hated of many. But although he speak generally of the people, yet he meaneth that part alone which was sound, neither yet infected with any poison of hatred; he signifieth briefly, that the faithful did so behave themselves, that the people did full well like of them for their innocency of life. ¹⁶⁰

The Lord added daily He showeth in these words that their diligence was not without profit; they studied so much as in them lay to gather into the Lord’s sheepfold those which wandered and went astray. He saith that their labor bestowed herein was not lost; because the Lord did increase his Church daily. And surely, whereas the Church is rather diminished than increased, that is to be imputed to our slothfulness, or rather forwardness. ¹⁶¹ And although they did all of them stoutly labor to increase the kingdom of Christ, yet Luke ascribeth ¹⁶² this honor to God alone, that he brought strangers into the Church. And surely this is his own proper work. For the ministers do no good by planting or watering, unless he make their labor effectual by the power of his Spirit, (1Co 3:0.) Furthermore, we must note that he saith, that those were gathered unto the Church which should be saved. For he teacheth that this is the means to attain salvation, if we be incorporate into the Church. For like as there is no remission of sins, so neither is there any hope of salvation. ¹⁶³ Furthermore, this is an excellent comfort for all the godly, that they were received into the Church that they might be saved; as the Gospel is called the power of God unto salvation to all that believe, (Rom 1:16.) Now, forasmuch as God doth gather only a part, or a certain number, this grace is restrained unto election, that it may be the first cause of our salvation.

Defender: Act 2:27

This remarkable prophecy of Messiah's resurrection was not fulfilled by David, as Peter said (Act 2:29). In fact, Peter and the other disciples could not even understand Jesus' straightforward promises of His coming death and resurrection, let alone the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. But when the event finally occurred, and the Holy Spirit came to indwell and teach them, Peter and the others became powerful expositors of the Scriptures, especially of the Messianic prophecies."

Defender: Act 2:34

See notes on Psa 110:1-7, from which Peter quoted. This prophecy records a remarkable conversation between two persons of the Godhead, implying the rejection of one by His foes on earth, followed by His return to heaven for a time."

Defender: Act 2:36

Jesus was the human name of the Savior, ordained by God Himself (Mat 1:21). "Christ," meaning "Messiah" or "Anointed One," is the title representing His three-fold office as Prophet, Priest and King - first of Israel, then of all nations. To those who are His own followers and servants, He is also their Lord (Rom 10:9). Thus His full name to those who know Him, is Lord Jesus Christ."

Defender: Act 2:38

Peter's message was climaxed with essentially the same exhortation as preached by John the Baptist - "the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (Luk 3:3). The difference is that now - and ever since - both repentance and baptism are to be "in the name of Jesus Christ." This, of course, implies faith in Christ as the only one who can provide remission of sins. Repentance toward God and faith toward Christ are like two sides of the same coin, each of which implies and requires the other. The full meaning of baptism in water also had now become evident, testifying of the baptism of the Spirit, as well as the death and resurrection of Christ. It is not that baptism is required for remission of sins (note, for example, the thief on the cross), but rather that baptism is always inseparably associated in Scripture with true repentance and faith."

Defender: Act 2:39

This would seem to indicate that Peter understood that the gospel message was for all nations, not just the Jews (in fact, Jesus had been quite explicit about this when He gave the Great Commission). However, Peter did not understand at this time that converts did not have to come to Christ by way of Judaism."

Defender: Act 2:41

That three thousand people could be baptized in one day has been doubted by some. This was a remarkable response to Peter's preaching - preceded and stimulated, of course, by Christ's resurrection and the miraculous manifestations of the Holy Spirit. But it was certainly not impossible. Assuming that the 120 disciples who had received the baptism of the Holy Spirit had already been baptized in water, either by John, John's disciples, or Jesus' disciples, it would be reasonable to assume that at least half of that company were able to perform the baptismal ceremony. There were a number of brooks and pools in the city of Jerusalem, so sixty disciples performing fifty baptisms each would be quite feasible, and would only take about four hours.

Defender: Act 2:41

The precedent set on the day of Pentecost seems to indicate that the new converts should be baptized as soon as they have truly repented and believed in the name of Jesus Christ. Delaying baptism or ignoring it altogether is clearly unscriptural."

Defender: Act 2:47

This is the first mention of the "church" in Acts; the context indicates that the reference is to the visible body of believers in Jerusalem, functioning as described in Act 2:44-47."

TSK: Act 2:27

leave : Psa 49:15, Psa 86:13, Psa 116:3; Luk 16:23; 1Co 15:55; Rev 1:18, Rev 20:13

thine : Act 3:14, Act 4:27; Psa 89:19; Mar 1:24; Luk 1:35, Luk 4:34; 1Jo 2:20; Rev 3:7

to see : Act 2:31, Act 13:27-37; Job 19:25-27; Jon 2:6; Joh 11:39; 1Co 15:52

TSK: Act 2:28

made : Psa 16:11, Psa 21:4, Psa 25:4; Pro 2:19, Pro 8:20; Joh 11:25, Joh 11:26, Joh 14:6

make : Psa 4:6, Psa 4:7, Psa 17:15, Psa 21:6, Psa 42:5; Heb 12:2

TSK: Act 2:29

let me : or, I may

freely : Act 26:26

the patriarch : Act 7:8, Act 7:9; Heb 7:4

David : Act 13:36; 1Ki 2:10

TSK: Act 2:30

being : Act 1:16; 2Sa 23:2; Mat 27:35; Mar 12:36; Luk 24:44; Heb 3:7, Heb 4:7; 2Pe 1:21

knowing : 2Sa 7:11-16; 1Ch 17:11-15; Psa 89:3, Psa 89:4, 19-37, Psa 110:1-5, Psa 132:11-18; Rom 1:3; 2Ti 2:8; Heb 7:1, Heb 7:2, Heb 7:21

with : Heb 6:17

he : Psa 2:6-12, 72:1-19; Isa 7:14, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7; Jer 23:5, Jer 23:6, Jer 33:14, Jer 33:15; Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12; Mic 5:2; Luk 1:31-33, Luk 1:69, Luk 1:70, Luk 2:10,Luk 2:11; Joh 18:36, Joh 18:37; Rom 15:12; Rev 17:14, Rev 19:16

TSK: Act 2:31

seeing : 1Pe 1:11, 1Pe 1:12

spake : Act 2:27, Act 13:35; Psa 16:10

TSK: Act 2:32

whereof : Act 2:24, Act 1:8, Act 1:22, Act 3:15, Act 4:33, Act 5:31, Act 5:32, Act 10:39-41; Luk 24:46-48; Joh 15:27; Joh 20:26-31

TSK: Act 2:33

by : Act 5:31; Psa 89:19, Psa 89:24, Psa 118:16, Psa 118:22, Psa 118:23; Isa 52:13, Isa 53:12; Mat 28:18; Mar 16:19; Joh 17:5; Eph 1:20-23; Phi 2:9-11; Heb 1:2-4, Heb 10:12; 1Pe 1:21, 1Pe 3:22

having : Act 1:4; Luk 24:49; Joh 7:38, Joh 7:39, Joh 14:16, Joh 14:26, Joh 15:26, Joh 16:7-15

he : Act 2:17, Act 2:38, Act 2:39, Act 10:45; Rom 5:5; Eph 4:8; Tit 3:6

TSK: Act 2:34

The Lord : Psa 110:1; Mat 22:42-45; Mar 12:36; Luk 20:42, Luk 20:43; 1Co 15:25; Eph 1:22; Heb 1:13

TSK: Act 2:35

thy foes : Gen 3:15; Jos 10:24, Jos 10:25; Psa 2:8-12, Psa 18:40-42, Psa 21:8-12, Psa 72:9; Isa 49:23; Isa 59:18, Isa 60:14, Isa 63:4-6; Luk 19:27, Luk 20:16-18; Rom 16:20; Rev 19:19-21; Rev 20:1-3, Rev 20:8-15

TSK: Act 2:36

all : Jer 2:4, Jer 9:26, Jer 31:31, Jer 33:14; Eze 34:30, Eze 39:25-29; Zec 13:1; Rom 9:3-6

that same : Act 2:22, Act 2:23, Act 4:11, Act 4:12, Act 5:30,Act 5:31, Act 10:36-42; Psa 2:1-8; Mat 28:18-20; Joh 3:35, Joh 3:36, Joh 5:22-29; Rom 14:8-12; 2Co 5:10; 2Th 1:7-10

TSK: Act 2:37

they : Act 5:33, Act 7:54; Eze 7:16; Zec 12:10; Luk 3:10; Joh 8:9, Joh 16:8-11; Rom 7:9; 1Co 14:24, 1Co 14:25; Heb 4:12, Heb 4:13

Men : Act 1:16

what : Act 9:5, Act 9:6, Act 16:29-31, Act 22:10, Act 24:25, Act 24:26

TSK: Act 2:38

Repent : Act 3:19, Act 17:30, Act 20:21, Act 26:20; Mat 3:2, Mat 3:8, Mat 3:9, Mat 4:17, Mat 21:28-32; Luke 15:1-32; Luk 24:47

be : Act 8:36-38, Act 16:15, Act 16:31-34, Act 22:16; Tit 3:5; 1Pe 3:21

in : Act 8:12, Act 8:16, Act 10:48, Act 19:4, Act 19:5; Mat 28:19; Rom 6:3; 1Co 1:13-17

and ye : Act 2:16-18, Act 8:15-17, Act 10:44, Act 10:45; Isa 32:15, Isa 44:3, Isa 44:4, Isa 59:21; Eze 36:25-27; Eze 39:29; Joe 2:28, Joe 2:29; Zec 12:10

TSK: Act 2:39

the promise : Act 3:25, Act 3:26; Gen 17:7, Gen 17:8; Psa 115:14, Psa 115:15; Jer 32:39, Jer 32:40; Eze 37:25; Joe 2:28; Rom 11:16, Rom 11:17; 1Co 7:14

and to all : Act 10:45, Act 11:15-18, Act 14:27, Act 15:3, Act 15:8, Act 15:14; Isa 59:19; Eph 2:13-22, Eph 3:5-8

as many : Joe 2:32; Rom 8:30, Rom 9:24, Rom 11:29; Eph 1:18, Eph 4:4; 2Th 1:11, 2Th 2:13, 2Th 2:14; 2Ti 1:9; Heb 3:1, Heb 9:15; 1Pe 5:10; 2Pe 1:3, 2Pe 1:10; Rev 17:14, Rev 19:9

TSK: Act 2:40

with : Act 15:32, Act 20:2, Act 20:9, Act 20:11, Act 28:23; Joh 21:25

did : Act 10:42, Act 20:21, Act 20:24; Gal 5:3; Eph 4:17; 1Th 2:11; 1Pe 5:12

Save : Num 16:28-34; Pro 9:6; Luk 21:36; 2Co 5:20, 2Co 6:17; 1Ti 4:16; Heb 3:12, Heb 3:13; Jam 4:8-10; Rev 3:17-19, Rev 18:4, Rev 18:5

untoward : Mat 3:7-10, Mat 12:34, Mat 16:4, Mat 17:17, Mat 23:33; Mar 8:38

TSK: Act 2:41

gladly : Act 2:37, Act 8:6-8, Act 13:48, Act 16:31-34; Mat 13:44-46; Gal 4:14, Gal 4:15; 1Th 1:6

were baptized : Act 2:38

added : Act 2:47, Act 1:15, Act 4:4; Psa 72:16, Psa 72:17, Psa 110:3; Luk 5:5-7; Joh 14:12

TSK: Act 2:42

they : Act 2:46, Act 11:23, Act 14:22; Mar 4:16, Mar 4:17; Joh 8:31, Joh 8:32; 1Co 11:2; Gal 1:6; Eph 2:20; Col 1:23; 2Ti 3:14; Heb 10:39; 2Pe 3:1, 2Pe 3:2, 2Pe 3:17, 2Pe 3:18; 1Jo 2:19

fellowship : Act 4:23, Act 5:12-14; 1Jo 1:3, 1Jo 1:7

in breaking : Act 20:7, Act 20:11; 1Co 10:16, 1Co 10:17, 1Co 10:21, 1Co 11:20-26

and in prayers : Act 1:14, Act 4:31, Act 6:4; Rom 12:12; Eph 6:18; Col 4:2; Heb 10:25; Jud 1:20

TSK: Act 2:43

fear : Act 5:11, Act 5:13; Est 8:17; Jer 33:9; Hos 3:5; Luk 7:16, Luk 8:37

many : Act 3:6-9, Act 4:33, Act 5:12, Act 5:15, Act 5:16, Act 9:34, Act 9:40; Mar 16:17; Joh 14:12

TSK: Act 2:44

had : Act 4:32, Act 5:4, Act 6:1-3; 2Co 8:9, 2Co 8:14, 2Co 8:15, 2Co 9:6-15; 1Jo 3:16-18

TSK: Act 2:45

sold : Act 4:34-37, Act 5:1, Act 5:2, Act 11:29; Luk 12:33, Luk 12:34, Luk 16:9, Luk 18:22, Luk 19:8

parted : Psa 112:9; Pro 11:24, Pro 11:25, Pro 19:17; Ecc 11:1, Ecc 11:2; Isa 58:7-12; 2Co 9:1, 2Co 9:9; 1Ti 6:18, 1Ti 6:19; Jam 2:14-16, Jam 5:1-5; 1Jo 3:17

TSK: Act 2:46

daily : Act 1:14, Act 3:1, Act 5:42; Luk 24:53

breaking : Act 2:42, Act 20:7

from house to house : or, at house, Act 1:13; 1Co 11:20-22

did : Act 16:34; Deu 12:7, Deu 12:12, Deu 16:11; Neh 8:10; Ecc 9:7; Luk 11:41; 1Co 10:30,1Co 10:31

singleness : Psa 86:11; Mat 6:22; Rom 12:8; 2Co 1:12, 2Co 11:3; Eph 6:5; Col 3:22

TSK: Act 2:47

having : Act 4:21, Act 4:33; Luk 2:52, Luk 19:48; Rom 14:18

the Lord : Act 2:39, Act 5:14, Act 11:24, Act 13:48; Rom 8:30, Rom 9:27, Rom 11:5-7; Tit 3:4, Tit 3:5

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Act 2:27

Thou wilt not leave my soul - The word "soul,"with us, means "the thinking, the immortal part of man,"and is applied to it whether existing in connection with the body or separate from it. The Hebrew word translated "soul"here, נפשׁ nephesh , however, may mean "spirit, mind, life,"and may denote here nothing more than "me"or "myself."It means, properly, "breath"; then "life,"or "the vital principle, a living being"; then "the soul, the spirit, the thinking part."Instances where it is put for the individual himself, meaning "me"or "myself"may be seen in Psa 11:1; Psa 35:3, Psa 35:7; Job 9:21. There is no clear instance in which it is applied to the soul in its separate state, or disjoined from the body. In this place it must be explained in part by the meaning of the word hell. If that means grave, then this word probably means "me"; thou wilt not leave me in the grave. The meaning probably is, "Thou wilt not leave me in Sheol, neither,"etc. The word "leave"here means, "Thou wilt not resign me to, or wilt not give me over to it, to be held under its power."

In hell - - εἰς ᾅδου eis Hadou . The word "hell,"in English, now commonly denotes "the place of the future eternal punishment of the wicked."This sense it has acquired by long usage. It is a Saxon word, derived from helan, "to cover,"and denotes literally "a covered or deep place"(Webster); then "the dark and dismal abode of departed spirits"; and then "the place of torment."As the word is used now by us, it by no means expresses the force of the original; and if with this idea we read a passage like the one before us, it would convey an erroneous meaning altogether, although formerly the English word perhaps expressed no more than the original. The Greek word "Hades"means literally "a place devoid of light; a dark, obscure abode"; and in Greek writers was applied to the dark and obscure regions where disembodied spirits were supposed to dwell. It occurs only eleven times in the New Testament. In this place it is the translation of the Hebrew שׁאול Sh^e owl .

In Rev 20:13-14, it is connected with death: "And death and hell (Hades) delivered up the dead which were in them"; "And death and hell (Hades) were cast into the lake of fire."See also Rev 6:8; Rev 1:18, "I have the keys of hell and death."In 1Co 15:55 it means the grave: "O grave (Hades), where is thy victory?"In Mat 11:23 it means a deep, profound place, opposed to an exalted one; a condition of calamity and degradation, opposed to former great prosperity: "Thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell"(Hades). In Luk 16:23 it is applied to the place where the rich man was after death, in a state of punishment: "In hell (Hades) he lifted up his eyes, being in torments."In this place it is connected with the idea of suffering, and undoubtedly denotes a place of punishment. The Septuagint has used this word commonly to translate the word שׁאול Sh^e ̀owl .

Once it is used as a translation of the phrase "the stones of the pit"Isa 14:19; twice to express silence, particularly the silence of the grave Psa 94:17; Psa 115:17; once to express the Hebrew for "the shadow of death"Job 38:17; and sixty times to translate the word Sheol. It is remarkable that it is never used in the Old Testament to denote the word קבר qeber , which properly denotes "a grave or sepulchre."The idea which was conveyed by the word Sheol, or Hades, was not properly a grave or sepulchre, but that dark, unknown state, including the grave, which constituted the dominions of the dead. What idea the Hebrews had of the future world it is now difficult to explain, and is not necessary in the case before us. The word originally denoting simply "the state of the dead, the insatiable demands of the grave,"came at last to be extended in its meaning, in proportion as they received new revelations or formed new opinions about the future world. Perhaps the following may be the process of thought by which the word came to have the special meanings which it is found to have in the Old Testament:

(1) The word "death"and the grave קבר qeber would express the abode of a deceased body in the earth.

\caps1 (2) m\caps0 an has a soul, a thinking principle, and the inquiry must arise, What will be its state? Will it die also? The Hebrews never appear to have believed that. Will it ascend to heaven at once? On that subject they had at first no knowledge. Will it go at once to a place of happiness or of torment? Of that, also, they had no information at first Yet they supposed it would live; and the word שׁאול Sh^e owl expressed just this state - the dark, unknown regions of the dead; the abode of spirits, whether good or bad; the residence of departed people, whether fixed in a permanent habitation, or whether wandering about. As they were ignorant of the size and spherical structure of the earth, they seem to have supposed this region to be situated in the earth, far below us, and hence, it is put in opposition to heaven, Psa 139:8, "If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in hell (Sheol), behold, thou art there"; Amo 9:2. The most common use of the word is, therefore, to express those dark regions, the lower world, the region of ghosts, etc. Instances of this, almost without number, might be given. See a most striking and sublime instance of this in Isa 14:9; "Hell from beneath is moved to meet thee,"etc.; where the assembled dead are represented as being agitated in all their vast regions at the death of the King of Babylon.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he inquiry could not but arise whether all these beings were happy. This point revelation decided; and it was decided in the O d Testament. Yet this word would better express the state of the wicked dead than the righteous. It conveyed the idea of darkness, gloom, wandering; the idea of a sad and unfixed abode, unlike heaven. Hence, the word sometimes expresses the idea of a place of punishment: Psa 9:17, "The wicked shall be turned into hell,"etc.; Pro 15:11; Pro 23:14; Pro 27:20; Job 26:6. While, therefore, the word does not mean properly a grave or a sepulchre, it does mean often "the state of the dead,"without designating whether in happiness or woe, but implying the continued existence of the soul. In this sense it is often used in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew word is Sheol, and the Greek Hades: Gen 37:35, "I will go down into the grave, unto my son, mourning"I will go down to the dead, to death, to my son, still there existing; Gen 42:38; Gen 44:29, "He shall bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave; Num 16:30, Num 16:33; 1Ki 2:6, 1Ki 2:9; etc. etc. in the place before us, therefore, the meaning is simply, thou wilt not leave me among the dead. This conveys all the idea. It does not mean literally the grave or the sepulchre; that relates only to the body. This expression refers to the deceased Messiah. Thou wilt not leave him among the dead; thou wilt raise him up. It is from this passage, perhaps, aided by two others (Rom 10:7, and 1Pe 3:19), that the doctrine originated that Christ "descended,"as it is expressed in the Creed, "into hell"; and many have invented strange opinions about his going among lost spirits. The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church has been that he went to purgatory, to deliver the spirits confined there. But if the interpretation now given be correct, then it will follow:

(1)    That nothing is affirmed here about the destination of the human soul of Christ after his death. That he went to the region of the dead is implied, but nothing further.

(2)    It may be remarked that the Scriptures affirm nothing about the state of his soul in that time which intervened between his death and resurrection. The only intimation which occurs on the subject is such as to leave us to suppose that he was in a state of happiness. To the dying thief he said, "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise."When Jesus died, he said, "It is finished"; and he doubtless meant by that that his sufferings and toils for man’ s redemption were at an end. All suppositions of any toils or pains after his death are fables, and without the slightest warrant in the New Testament.

Thine Holy One - The word in the Hebrew which is translated here "Holy One"properly denotes "One who is tenderly and piously devoted to another,"and corresponds to the expression used in the New Testament, "my beloved Son."It is also used, as it is here by the Septuagint and by Peter, to denote "One that is holy, that is set apart to God."In this sense it is applied to Christ, either as being set apart to this office, or as so pure as to make it proper to designate him by way of eminence the Holy One, or the Holy One of God. It is several times used as the wellknown designation of the Messiah: Mar 1:24, "I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God"; Luk 4:34; Act 3:14, "But ye denied the Holy One, and the just,"etc. See also Luk 1:35, "That holy thing that is born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

To see corruption - To see corruption is to experience it, to be made partakers of it. The Hebrews often expressed the idea of experiencing anything by the use of words pertaining to the senses, as, to taste of death, to see death, etc. Corruption here means putrefaction in the grave. The word which is used in the Psalm, שׁחת shachath , is thus used in Job 17:14, "I have said to corruption, thou art my father,"etc. The Greek word used here properly denotes this. Thus, it is used in Act 13:34-37. This meaning would be properly suggested by the Hebrew word, and thus the ancient versions understood it. The meaning implied in the expression is, that he of whom the Psalm was written should be restored to life again; and this meaning Peter proceeds to show that the words must have.

Barnes: Act 2:28

Thou hast made known ... - The Hebrew is, "Thou wilt make known to me,"etc. In relation to the Messiah, it means, Thou wilt restore me to life.

The ways of life - This properly means the path to life; as we say, the road to preferment or honor; the path to happiness; the highway to ruin, etc. See Pro 7:26-27. It means, thou wilt make known to me life itself, that is, thou wilt restore me to life. The expressions in the Psalm are capable of this interpretation without doing any violence to the text; and if the preceding verses refer to the death and burial of the Messiah, then the natural and proper meaning of this is, that he would be restored to life again.

Thou shalt make me full of joy - This expresses the feelings of the Messiah in view of the favor that would thus be showed him; the resurrection from the dead, and the elevation to the right hand of God. It was this which is represented as sustaining him the prospect of the joy that was before him, in heaven, Heb 12:2; Eph 1:20-22.

With thy countenance - Literally, "with thy face,"that is, in thy presence. The words "countenance"and "presence"mean the same thing, and denote "favor,"or the "honor and happiness"provided by being admitted to the presence of God. The prospect of the honor that would be bestowed on the Messiah was what sustained him. And this proves that the person contemplated in the Psalm expected to be raised from the dead, and exalted to the presence of God. That expectation is now fulfilled, and the Messiah is now filled with joy in his exaltation to the throne of the universe. He has "ascended to his Father and our Father"; he is "seated at the right hand of God"; he has entered on that "joy which was set before him"; he is "crowned with glory and honor"; and "all things are put under his feet."In view of this, we may remark:

(1)    That the Messiah had full and confident expectation that he would rise from the dead. This the Lord Jesus always evinced, and often declared it to his disciples.

(2)\caps1     i\caps0 f the Saviour rejoiced in view of the glories before him, we should also. We should anticipate with joy an everlasting dwelling in the presence of God, and the high honor of sitting "with him on his throne, as he overcame, and is set down with the Father on his throne."

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 he prospect of this should sustain us, as it did him, in the midst of persecution, calamity, and trials. Thy will soon be ended; and if we are his friends, we shall "overcome,"as he did, and be admitted to "the fulness of joy"above, and to the "right hand"of God, "where are pleasures forevermore."

Barnes: Act 2:29

Men and brethren - This passage of the Psalms Peter now proves could not relate to David, but must have reference to the Messiah. He begins his argument in a respectful manner, addressing them as his brethren, though they had just charged him and the others with intoxication. Christians should use the usual respectful forms of salutation, whatever contempt and reproaches they may meet with from opposers.

Let me freely speak - That is, "It is lawful or proper to speak with boldness, or openly, respecting David."Though he was eminently a pious man, though venerated by us all as a king, yet it is proper to say of him that he is dead, and has returned to corruption. This was a delicate way of expressing high respect for the monarch whom they all honored, and yet evinced boldness in examining a passage of Scripture which probably many supposed to have reference solely to him.

Of the patriarch David - The word "patriarch"properly means "the head or ruler of a family"; and then "the founder of a family, or an illustrious ancestor."It was commonly applied to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by way of eminence, the illustrious founders of the Jewish nation, Heb 7:4; Act 7:8-9. It was also applied to the heads of the families, or the chief men of the tribes of Israel, 1Ch 24:31; 2Ch 19:8, etc. It was thus a title of honor, denoting "high respect."Applied to David, it means that he was the illustrious head or founder of the royal family, and the word is expressive of Peter’ s intention not to say anything disrespectful of such a king, at the same time that he freely canvassed a passage of Scripture which had been supposed to refer to him.

Dead and buried - The record of that fact they had in the O d Testament. There had been no pretence that he had risen, and therefore the Psalm could not apply to him.

His sepulchre is with us - Is in the city of Jerusalem., Sepulchres wore commonly situated without the walls of cities and the limits of villages. The custom of burying in towns was not commonly practiced. This was true of other ancient nations as well as the Hebrews, and is still in Eastern countries, except in the case of kings and very distinguished men, whose ashes are permitted to rest within the walls of a city: 1Sa 28:3, "Samuel was dead ...and Israel ...buried him in Ramah, in his own city"; 2Ki 21:18, "Manasseh ...was buried in the garden of his own house"; 2Ch 16:14, Asa was buried in the city of David; 2Ki 14:20. David was buried in the city of David 1Ki 2:10, with his fathers; that is, on Mount Zion, where he built a city called after his name, 2Sa 5:7. Of what form the tombs of the kings were is not certainly known. It is almost certain, however, that they would be constructed in a magnificent manner.

The tombs were commonly excavations from rocks, or natural caves; and sepulchres cut out of the solid rock, of vast extent, are Known to have existed. The following account of the tomb called "the sepulchre of the kings"is abridged from Maundrell: "The approach is through an entrance cut out of a solid rock, which admits you into an open court about 40 paces square, cut down into the rock. On the south side is a portico nine paces long and four broad, hewn likewise out of the solid rock. At the end of the portico is the descent to the sepulchres. The descent is into a room about 7 or 8 yards square, cut out of the natural rock. From this room there are passages into six more, all of the same fabric with the first. In every one of these rooms, except the first, were coffins placed in niches in the sides of the chamber,"etc. (Maundrell’ s Travels). If the tombs of the kings were of this form, it is clear that they were works of great labor and expense.

Probably, also, there were, as there are now, costly and splendid monuments erected to the memory of the mighty dead. The following extract from "The Land and the Book,"and cut on the next page (from Williams’ Holy City), will illustrate the usual construction of tombs: "The entire system of rooms, niches, and passages may be comprehended at once by an inspection of the plan of the Tombs of the Judges near Jerusalem. The entrance faces the west, and has a vestibule (a) 13 feet by 9. Chamber (B), nearly 20 feet square, and 8 high. The north side is seen in elevation in Fig. 2, and shows two tiers of niches, one over the other, not often met with in tombs. There are seven in the lower tier, each 7 feet long, 20 inches wide, and nearly 3 feet high. The upper tier has three arched recesses, and each recess has two niches. From this room (B) doors lead out into chambers (C and D), which have their own special system of niches, or Ioculi, for the reception of the bodies, as appears on the plan. I have explored scores of sepulchres at Ladakiyeh closely resembling this at Jerusalem, and there are many in the plain and on the hillsides above us here at Sidon of the same general form chambers within chambers, and each with niches for the dead, variously arranged according to taste or necessity."

These tombs are about a mile northwest of Jerusalem. "The tombs which are commonly called the ‘ Tombs of the Kings’ are in an olivegrove about half a mile north of the Damascus Gate, and a few rods east of the great road to Nablus. A court is sunk in the solid rock about 90 feet square and 20 deep. On the west side of this court is a sort of portico, 39 feet long, 17 deep, and 15 high. It was originally ornamented with grapes, garlands, and festoons, beautifully done on the cornice; and the columns in the center, and the pilasters at the corners, appear to have resembled the Corinthian order. A very low door in the south end of the portico opens into the ante-chamber - 19 feet square, and 7 or 8 high. From this three passages conduct into other rooms, two of them, to the south, having five or six crypts. A passage also leads from the west room down several steps into a large vault running north, where are crypts parallel to the sides. These rooms are all cut in rock intensely hard, and the entrances were originally closed with stone doors, made with panels and hung on stone hinges, which are now all broken. The whole series of tombs indicates the hand of royalty and the leisure of years, but by whom and for whom they were made is a mere matter of conjecture. I know no good reason for ascribing them to Helena of Adiabene. Most travelers and writers are inclined to make them the sepulchres of the Asmonean kings"(The Land and the Book, vol. 2, pp. 487, 488). The site of the tomb of David is no longer known.

Unto this day - That the sepulchre of David was well known and honored is clear from Josephus (Antiq., book 7, chapter 15, section 3): "He (David) was buried by his son Solomon in Jerusalem with great magnificence, and with all the other funeral pomps with which kings used to be buried. Moreover, he had immense wealth buried with him: for one thousand and three hundred years afterward Hyrcanus the high priest, when he was besieged by Antiochus, and was desirous of giving him money to raise the siege, opened one room of David’ s sepulchre and took out three thousand talents. Herod, many years afterward, opened another room, and took away a great deal of money,"etc. See also Antiq., book 13, chapter 8, section 4. The tomb of a monarch like David would be well known and had in reverence. Peter might, then, confidently appeal to their own belief and knowledge that David had not been raised from the dead. No Jew believed or supposed it. All, by their care of his sepulchre, and by the honor with which they regarded his grave, believed that he had returned to corruption. The Psalm, therefore, could not apply to him.

Barnes: Act 2:30

Therefore - As David was dead and buried, it was clear that he could not have referred to himself in this remarkable declaration. It followed that he must have had reference to some other one.

Being a prophet - One who foretold future events. That David was inspired is clear, 2Sa 23:2. Many of the prophecies relating to the Messiah are found in the Psalms of David: Psa 22:1, compare Mat 27:46; Luk 24:44 - Psa 22:18, compare Mat 27:35 - Psa 69:21, compare Mat 27:34, Mat 27:48 - Psa 69:25, compare Act 1:20.

And knowing - Knowing by what God had said to him respecting his posterity.

Had sworn with an oath - The places which speak of God as having sworn to David are found in Psa 89:3-4, "I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish,"etc.; and Psa 132:11, "The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David, he will not turn from it, Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon my throne"; Psa 89:35-36. The promise to which reference is made in all these places is in 2Sa 7:11-16.

Of the fruit of his loins - Of his descendants. See 2Sa 7:12; Gen 35:11; Gen 46:26; 1Ki 8:19, etc.

According to the flesh - That is, so far as the human nature of the Messiah was concerned, he would be descended from David. Expressions like these are very remarkable. If the Messiah was only a man, they would be unmeaning. They are never used in relation to a mere man; and they imply that the speaker or writer supposed that there pertained to the Messiah a nature which was not according to the flesh. See Rom 1:3-4.

He would raise up Christ - That is, the Messiah. To raise up seed, or descendants, is to give them to him. The promises made to David in all these places had immediate reference to Solomon and to his descendants. But it is clear that the New Testament writers understood them as referring also to the Messiah. And it is no less clear that the Jews understood that the Messiah was to be descended from David, Mat 12:23; Mat 21:9; Mat 22:42, Mat 22:45; Mar 11:10; Joh 7:42, etc. In what way these promises that were made to David were understood as applying to the Messiah, it may not be easy to determine. The fact, however, is clear. The following remarks may throw some light on the subject:

(a)    The kingdom which was promised to David was to have no end; it was to be established forever. Yet his descendants died, and all other kingdoms changed.

(b)    The promise likewise stood by itself; it was not made to any other of the Jewish kings; nor were similar declarations made of surrounding kingdoms and nations. It came, therefore, gradually to be applied to that future king and kingdom which was the hope of the nation; and their eyes were anxiously fixed on the long-expected Messiah.

©    At the time that he came it had become the settled doctrine of the Jews that he was to descend from David, and that his kingdom was to be perpetual.

On this belief of the prophecy the apostles argued; and the opinions of the Jews furnished a strong point by which they could convince them that Jesus was the Messiah. Peter affirms that David was aware of this, and that he so understood the promise as referring not only to Solomon, but in a far more important sense to the Messiah. Happily we have a commentary of David himself as expressing his own views of that promise. That commentary is found particularly in Psa 2:1-12; Ps. 22; Ps. 69; and Psa 16:1-11; In these Psalms there can be no doubt that David looked forward to the coming of the Messiah; and there can be as little that he regarded the promise made to him as extending to his coming and his reign.

It may be remarked that there are some important variations in the manuscripts in regard to this verse. The expression "according to the flesh"is omitted in many mss., and is now left out by Griesbach in his New Testament. It is omitted also by the ancient Syriac and Ethiopic versions, and by the Latin Vulgate.

To sit on his throne - To be his successor in his kingdom. Saul was the first of the kings of Israel. The kingdom was taken away from him and his posterity, and conferred on David and his descendants. It was determined that it should be continued in the family of David, and no more go out of his family, as it had from the family of Saul. The unique characteristic of David as king, or what distinguished him from the other kings of the earth, was that he reigned over the people of God. Israel was his chosen people, and the kingdom was over that nation. Hence, he that should reign over the people of God, though in a manner somewhat different from David, would be regarded as occupying his throne, and as being his successor. The form of the administration might be varied, but it would still retain its prime characteristic as being a reign over the people of God. In this sense the Messiah sits on the throne of David. He is his descendant and successor. He has an empire over all the friends of the Most High. And as that kingdom is destined to fill the earth, and to be eternal in the heavens, so it may be said that it is a kingdom which shall have no end. It is spiritual, but not the less real; defended not with carnal weapons, but not the less really defended; advanced not by the sword and the din of arms, but not the less really advanced against principalities, and powers, and spiritual wickedness in high places; not under a visible head and earthly monarch, but not less really under the Captain of salvation and the King of kings.

Barnes: Act 2:31

He, seeing this before ... - By the spirit of prophecy. From this it appears that David had distinct views of the great doctrines pertaining to the Messiah.

Spake ... - See Psa 16:1-11.

That his soul ... - See the notes on Act 2:27.

Barnes: Act 2:32

This Jesus - Peter, having shown that it was predicted that the Messiah would rise, now affirms that such a resurrection occurred in the case of Jesus. If it was a matter of prophecy, all objection to the truth of the doctrine was taken away, and the only question was whether there was evidence that this had been done. The proof of this Peter now alleges, and offers his own testimony, and that of his brethren, to the truth of this great and glorious fact.

We are all witnesses - It seems probable that Peter refers here to the whole 120 who were present, and who were ready to attest it in any manner. The matter which was to be proved was that Jesus was seen alive after he had been put to death. The apostles were appointed to bear witness of this. We are told by Paul 1Co 15:6 that he was seen by more than five hundred brethren, that is, Christians, at one time. The 120 assembled on this occasion were doubtless part of the number, and were ready to attest this. This was the proof that Peter alleged; and the strength of this proof was, and should have been, perfectly irresistible:

(1)    They had seen him themselves. They did not conjecture it or reason about it; but they had the evidence on which people act every day, and which must be regarded as satisfactory the evidence of their own senses.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 he number was such they could not be imposed on. If 120 persons could not prove a plain matter of fact, nothing could be established by testimony; there could be no way of arriving at any facts.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 he thing to be established was a plain matter. It was not that they "saw him rise."That they never pretended: Impostors would have done this. But it was that they saw him, talked, walked, ate, drank with him, being alive, after, he had been crucified. The fact of his death was matter of Jewish record, and no one called it in question. The only fact for Christianity to make out was that he was seen alive afterward, and this was attested by many witnesses.

(4)\caps1     t\caps0 hey had no interest in deceiving the world in this thing. There was no prospect of pleasure, wealth, or honor in doing it.

(5)\caps1     t\caps0 hey offered themselves now as ready to endure any sufferings, or to die, in attestation of the truth of this event.

Barnes: Act 2:33

Therefore, being by the right hand - The right hand among the Hebrews was often used to denote "power"; and the expression here means, not that he was exalted to the right hand of God. but by his power. He was raised from the dead by his power, and borne to heaven, triumphant over all his enemies. The use of the word "right hand"to denote "power"is common in the Scriptures: Job 40:14, "Thine own right hand can save thee"; Psa 17:7, "Thou savest by thy right hand them that trust in thee"; Psa 18:35; Psa 20:6; Psa 21:8; Psa 44:3; Psa 60:5, etc.

Exalted - Constituted King and Messiah in heaven. Raised up from his condition of humiliation to the glory which he had with the Father before the world was, Joh 17:5.

And having received ... - The Holy Spirit was promised to the disciples before his death, Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:13-15. It was expressly declared:

(1)    That the Holy Spirit would not be given except the Lord Jesus should return to heaven Joh 16:7; and,

(2)    That this gift was in the power of the Father, and that he would send him, Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26. This promise was now fulfilled, and those who witnessed the extraordinary scene before them could not doubt that it was the effect of divine power.

Hath shed forth this ... - This power of speaking different languages and declaring the truth of the gospel. In this way Peter accounts for the remarkable events before them. What had occurred could not be produced by new wine, Act 2:15. It was expressly foretold, Act 2:16-21. It was predicted that Jesus would rise, Act 2:22-31. The apostles were witnesses that he had risen, and that he had promised that the Holy Spirit would descend; and the fulfillment of this promise was a rational way of accounting for the scene before them. It was unanswerable; and the effect on those who witnessed it was such as might be expected.

Barnes: Act 2:34-35

For David is not ascended into the heavens - That is, David has not risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. This further shows that Psa 16:1-11 could not refer to David, but must refer to the Messiah. Great as they esteemed David, and much as they were accustomed to apply these expressions of the Scripture to him, yet they could not be applicable to him. They must refer to some other being; and especially that passage which Peter now proceeds to quote. It was of great importance to show that these expressions could not apply to David, and also that David bore testimony to the exalted character and dignity of the Messiah. Hence, Peter here adduces David himself as affirming that the Messiah was to be exalted to a dignity far above his own. This does not affirm that David was not saved, or that his spirit had not ascended to heaven, but that he had not been exalted in the heavens in the sense in which Peter was speaking of the Messiah.

But he saith himself - Psa 110:1.

The Lord - The small capitals used in translating the word "Lord"in the Bible denote that the original word is יהוה Yahweh . The Hebrews regarded this as the unique name of God, a name incommunicable to any other being. It is not applied to any being but God in the Scriptures. The Jews had such a reverence for it that they never pronounced it; but when it occurred in the Scriptures they pronounced another name, אדני ̀Adonaay . Here it means, "Yahweh said,"etc.

My Lord - This is a different word in the Hebrew - it is אדני ̀Adonaay . It properly is applied by a servant to his master, or a subject to his sovereign, or is used as a title of respect by an inferior to a superior. It means here, "Yahweh said to him whom I, David, acknowledge to be my superior and sovereign."Thus, though he regarded him as his descendant according to the flesh, yet he regarded him also as his superior and Lord. By reference to this passage our Saviour confounded the Pharisees, Mat 22:42-46. That the passage in this Psalm refers to the Messiah is clear. Our Saviour, in Mat 22:42, expressly applied it thus, and in such a manner as to show that this was the well-understood doctrine of the Jews. See the notes on Mat 22:42, etc.

Barnes: Act 2:36

Therefore let all ... - "Convinced by the prophecies, by our testimony, and by the remarkable scenes exhibited on the day of Pentecost, let all be convinced that the true Messiah has come and has been exalted to heaven."

House of Israel - The word "house"often means "family": "let all the family of Israel, that is, all the nation of the Jews, know this."

Know assuredly - Be assured, or know without any hesitation or possibility of mistake. This is the sum of his argument or his discourse. He had established the points which he purposed to prove, and he now applies it to his hearers.

God hath made - God hath appointed or constituted. See Act 5:31.

That same Jesus - The very person who had suffered. He was raised with the same body, and had the same soul; he was the same being, as distinguished from all others. So Christians, in the resurrection, will be the same beings that they were before they died.

Whom ye have crucified - See Act 2:23. There was nothing better suited to show them the guilt of having done this than the argument which Peter used. He showed them that God had sent him as the Messiah, and that he had showed his love for him in raising him from the dead. The Son of God, and the hope of their nation, they had put to death. He was not an impostor, nor a man sowing sedition, nor a blasphemer, but the Messiah of God; and they had imbrued their hands in his blood. There is nothing better suited to make sinners fear and tremble than to show them that, in rejecting Christ, they have rejected God; in refusing to serve him they have refused to serve God. The crime of sinners has a double malignity, as committed against a kind and lovely Saviour, and against the God who loved him, and appointed him to save people. Compare Act 3:14-15.

Both Lord - The word "lord"properly denotes "proprietor, master, or sovereign."Here it means clearly that God had exalted him to be the king so long expected; and that he had given him dominion in the heavens, or, as we should say, made him ruler of all things. The extent of this dominion may be seen in Joh 17:2; Eph 1:21, etc. In the exercise of this orifice, he now rules in heaven and on earth, and will yet come to judge the world. This truth was particularly suited to excite their fear. They had murdered their sovereign, now shown to be raised from the dead, and entrusted with infinite power. They had reason, therefore, to fear that he would come forth in vengeance, and punish them for their crimes. Sinners, in opposing the Saviour, are at war with their living and mighty sovereign and Lord. He has all power, and it is not safe to contend against the judge of the living and the dead.

And Christ - Messiah. They had thus crucified the hope of their nation; imbrued their hands in the blood of him to whom the prophets had looked; and put to death that Holy One, the prospect of whose coming had sustained the most holy men of the world in affliction, and cheered them when they looked on to future years. He who was the hope of their fathers had come, and they had put him to death; and it is no wonder that the consciousness of this - that a sense of guilt, and shame, and confusion should overwhelm their minds, and lead them to ask, in deep distress, what they should do.

Barnes: Act 2:37

Now when they heard this - When they heard this declaration of Peter, and this proof that Jesus was the Messiah. There was no fanaticism in his discourse; it was cool, close, pungent reasoning. He proved to them the truth of what he was saying, and thus prepared the way for this effect.

They were pricked in their heart - The word translated were "pricked," κατενύγησαν katenugēsan , is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. It properly denotes "to pierce or penetrate with a needle, lancet, or sharp instrument"; and then "to pierce with grief, or acute pain of any kind."It corresponds precisely to our word "compunction."It implies also the idea of sudden as well as acute grief. In this case it means that they were suddenly and deeply affected with anguish and alarm at what Peter had said. The causes of their grief may have been these:

(1)    Their sorrow that the Messiah had been put to death by his own countrymen.

(2)\caps1     t\caps0 heir deep sense of guilt in having done this. There would be mingled here a remembrance of ingratitude, and a consciousness that they had been guilty of murder of the most aggravated and horrid kind, that of having killed their own Messiah.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 he fear of his wrath. He was still alive; exalted to be theft Lord; and entrusted with all power. They were afraid of his vengeance; they were conscious that they deserved it; and they supposed that they were exposed to it.

(4)\caps1     w\caps0 hat they had done could not be undone. The guilt remained; they could not wash it out. They had imbrued theft hands in the blood of innocence, and the guilt of that oppressed their souls. This expresses the usual feelings which sinners have when they are convicted of sin.

Men and brethren - This was an expression denoting affectionate earnestness. Just before this they mocked the disciples, and charged them with being filled with new wine, Act 2:13. They now treated them with respect and confidence. The views which sinners have of Christians and Christian ministers are greatly changed when they are under conviction for sin. Before that they may deride and oppose them; then, they are glad to be taught by the obscurest Christian, and even cling to a minister of the gospel as if he could save them by his own power.

What shall we do? - What shall we do to avoid the wrath of this crucified and exalted Messiah? They were apprehensive of his vengeance, and they wished to know how to avoid it. Never was a more important question asked than this. It is the question which all convicted sinners ask. It implies an apprehension of danger, a sense of guilt, and a readiness to "yield the will"to the claims of God. This was the same question asked by Paul Act 9:6, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"and by the jailor Act 16:30 "He ...came, trembling, ...and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"The state of mind in this case - the case of a convicted sinner - consists in:

(1)    A deep sense of the evil of the past life; remembrance of a thousand crimes perhaps before forgotten; a pervading and deepening conviction that the heart, and conversation, and life have been evil, and deserve condemnation.

(2)    Apprehension about the justice of God; alarm when the mind looks upward to him, or onward to the day of death and judgment.

(3)\caps1     a\caps0 n earnest wish, amounting sometimes to agony, to be delivered from this sense of condemnation and this apprehension of the future.

(4)\caps1     a\caps0 readiness to sacrifice all to the will of God; to surrender the governing purpose of the mind, and to do what he requires. In this state the soul is prepared to receive the offers of eternal life; and when the sinner comes to this, the offers of mercy meet his case, and he yields himself to the Lord Jesus, and finds peace.

In regard to this discourse of Peter, and this remarkable result, we may observe:

(1) That this is the first discourse which was preached after the ascension of Christ, and is a model which the ministers of religion should imitate.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is a clear and close argument. There is no ranting, no declamation, nothing but truth presented in a clear and striking manner. It abounds with proof of his main point, and supposes that his hearers were rational beings, and capable of being influenced by truth. Ministers have no right to address people as incapable of reason and thought, nor to imagine, because they are speaking on religious subjects, that therefore they are at liberty to speak nonsense.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hough these were eminent sinners, and had added to the crime of murdering the Messiah that of deriding the Holy Spirit and the ministers of the gospel, yet Peter reasoned with them coolly, and endeavored to convince them of their guilt. People should be treated as endowed with reason, and as capable of seeing the force and beauty of the great truths of religion.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 he arguments of Peter were adapted to produce this effect on their minds, and to impress them deeply with the sense of their guilt. He proved to them that they had been guilty of putting the Messiah to death; that God had raised him up, and that they were now in the midst of the scenes which established one strong proof of the truth of what he was saying. No class of truths could have been so well adapted to make an impression of their guilt as these.

(5) Conviction for sin is a rational process on a sinner’ s mind. It is the proper state produced by a view of past sins. It is suffering truth to make an appropriate impression; suffering the mind to feel as it ought to feel. The man who is guilty ought to be willing to see and confess it. It is no disgrace to confess an error, or to feel deeply when we know we are guilty. Disgrace consists in a hypocritical desire to conceal crime; in the pride that is unwilling to avow it; in the falsehood which denies it. To feel it and to acknowledge it is the mark of an open and ingenuous mind.

\caps1 (6) t\caps0 hese same truths are adapted still to produce conviction for sin. The sinner’ s treatment of the Messiah should produce grief and alarm. He did not murder him, but he has rejected him; he did not crown him with thorns, but he has despised him; he did not insult him when hanging on the cross, but he has a thousand times insulted him since; he did not pierce his side with the spear, but he has pierced his heart by rejecting him and contemning his mercy. "For these things he should weep."In the Saviour’ s resurrection he has also a deep interest. He rose as the pledge that we may rise; and when the sinner looks forward, he should remember that he must meet the ascended Son of God. The Saviour reigns; he lives, Lord of all. The sinner’ s deeds now are aimed at his throne, and his heart, and his crown. All his crimes are seen by his sovereign, and it is not safe to mock the Son of God on his throne, or to despise him who will soon come to judgment. When the sinner feels these truths he should tremble and cry out, What shall I do?

\caps1 (7) w\caps0 e see here how the Spirit operates in producing conviction of sin. It is not in an arbitrary manner; it is in accordance with truth, and by the truth. Nor have we a right to expect that he will convict and convert people except as the truth is presented to their minds. They who desire success in the gospel should present clear, striking, and impressive truth, for such only God is accustomed to bless.

\caps1 (8) w\caps0 e have in the conduct of Peter and the other apostles a striking instance of the power of the gospel. Just before, Peter, trembling and afraid, had denied his Master with an oath; now, in the presence of the murderers of the Son of God, he boldly charged them with their crime, and dared their fury. Just before, all the disciples forsook the Lord Jesus and fled; now, in the presence of his murderers, they lifted their voice and proclaimed their guilt and danger, even in the city where he had been just arraigned and put to death. What could have produced this change but the power of God? And is there not proof here that a religion which produces such changes came from heaven?

Barnes: Act 2:38

Then Peter said unto them - Peter had been the chief speaker, though others had also addressed them. He now, in the name of all, directed the multitude what to do.

Repent - See the notes on Mat 3:2. Repentance implies sorrow for sin as committed against God, along with a purpose to forsake it. It is not merely a fear of the consequences of sin or of the wrath of God in hell. It is such a view of sin, as evil in itself, as to lead the mind to hate it and forsake it. Laying aside all view of the punishment of sin, the true penitent hates it. Even if sin were the means of procuring him happiness; if it would promote his gratification and be unattended with any future punishment, he would hate it and turn from it. The mere fact that it is evil, and that God hates it, is a sufficient reason why those who are truly penitent hate it and forsake it. False repentance dreads the consequences of sin; true repentance dreads sin itself. These persons whom Peter addressed had been merely alarmed; they were afraid of wrath, and especially of the wrath of the Messiah. They had no true sense of sin as an evil, but were simply afraid of punishment. This alarm Peter did not regard as by any means genuine repentance. Such conviction for sin would soon wear off, unless their repentance became thorough and complete. Hence, he told them to repent, to turn from sin, to exercise sorrow for it as an evil and bitter thing, and to express their sorrow in the proper manner. We may learn here:

(1) That there is no safety in mere conviction for sin: it may soon pass off, and leave the soul as thoughtless as before.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 here is no goodness or holiness in mere alarm or conviction. The devils ...tremble. A man may fear who yet has a firm purpose to do evil, if he can do it with impunity.

\caps1 (3) m\caps0 any are greatly troubled and alarmed who never repent. There is no situation where souls are so easily deceived as here. Alarm is taken for repentance; trembling for godly sorrow; and the fear of wrath is taken to be the true fear of God.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 rue repentance is the only thing in such a state of mind that can give any relief. An ingenuous confession of sin, a solemn purpose to forsake it, and a true hatred of it, is the only thing that can give the mind composure. Such is the constitution of the mind that nothing else will furnish relief. But the moment we are willing to make an open confession of guilt, the mind is delivered of its burden, and the convicted soul finds peace. Until this is done, and the hold on sin is broken, there can be no peace.

\caps1 (5) w\caps0 e see here what direction is to be given to a convicted sinner. We are not to direct him to wait; nor to lead him to suppose that he is in a good way; nor to tell him to continue to seek; nor to call him a mourner; nor to take sides with him, as if God were wrong and harsh; nor to advise him to read, and search, and postpone the subject to a future time. We are to direct him to repent; to mourn over his sins, and to forsake them. Religion demands that he should at once surrender himself to God by genuine repentance; by confession that God is right and that he is wrong; and by a firm purpose to live a life of holiness.

Be baptized - See the notes on Mat 3:6, Mat 3:16. The direction which Christ gave to his apostles was that they should baptize all who believed, Mat 28:19; Mar 16:16. The Jews had not been baptized; and a baptism now would be a profession of the religion of Christ, or a declaration made before the world that they embraced Jesus as their Messiah. It was equivalent to saying that they should publicly and professedly embrace Jesus Christ as their Saviour. The gospel requires such a profession, and no one is at liberty to withhold it. A similar declaration is to be made to all who are inquiring the way to life. They are to exercise repentance; and then, without any unnecessary delay, to evince it by partaking of the ordinances of the gospel. If people are unwilling to profess religion, they have none. If they will not, in the proper way, show that they are truly attached to Christ, it is proof that they have no such attachment. Baptism is the application of water, as expressive of the need of purification, and as emblematic of the influences from God that can alone cleanse the soul. It is also a form of dedication to the service of God.

In the name of Jesus Christ - Not εἰς eis , into, but ἐπί epi , upon. The usual form of baptism is into the name of the Father, etc. - εἰς eis . Here it does not mean to be baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ, but it means to be baptized for him and his service; to be consecrated in this way, and by this public profession, to him and to his cause. The expression is literally upon the name of Jesus Christ: that is, as the foundation of the baptism, or as that on which its propriety rested or was based. In other words, it is with an acknowledgment of him in that act as being what his name imports the Sinner’ s only Hope, his Redeemer, Lord, Justifier, King (Prof. Hackett, in loco). The name of Jesus Christ means the same as Jesus Christ himself. To be baptized to his name is to be devoted to him. The word "name"is often thus used. The profession which they were to make amounted to this: a confession of sins; a hearty purpose to turn from them; a reception of Jesus as the Messiah and as a Saviour; and a determination to become his followers and to be devoted to his service. Thus, 1Co 10:2, to be baptized unto Moses means to take him as a leader and guide. It does not follow that, in administering the ordinance of baptism, they used only the name of Jesus Christ. It is much more probable that they used the form prescribed by the Saviour himself Mat 28:19; though, as the special mark of a Christian is that he receives and honors Jesus Christ, this name is used here as implying the whole. The same thing occurs in Act 19:5.

For the remission of sins - Not merely the sin of crucifying the Messiah, but of all sins. There is nothing in baptism itself that can wash away sin. That can be done only by the pardoning mercy of God through the atonement of Christ. But baptism is expressive of a willingness to be pardoned in that way, and is a solemn declaration of our conviction that there is no other way of remission. He who comes to be baptized, comes with a professed conviction that he is a sinner; that there is no other way of mercy but in the gospel, and with a professed willingness to comply with the terms of salvation, and to receive it as it is offered through Jesus Christ.

And ye shall receive ... - The gift of the Holy Spirit here does not mean his extraordinary gifts, or the power of working miracles, but it simply means, you shall partake of the influences of the Holy Spirit "as far as they may be adapted to your case"- as far as may be needful for your comfort, peace, and sanctification. There is no evidence that they were all endowed with the power of working miracles, nor does the connection of the passage require us thus to understand it. Nor does it mean that they had not been awakened "by his influences."All true conviction is from him, Joh 16:8-10. But it is also the office of the Spirit to comfort, to enlighten, to give peace, and thus to give evidence that the soul is born again. To this, probably, Peter refers; and this all who are born again and profess faith in Christ possess. There is peace, calmness, joy; there is evidence of piety, and that evidence is the product of the influences of the Spirit. "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,"etc., Gal 5:22, Gal 5:24.

Barnes: Act 2:39

For the promise - That is, the promise respecting the particular thing of which he was speaking - the influences of the Holy Spirit. This promise he had adduced in the beginning of his discourse Act 2:17, and he now applies it to them. As the Spirit was promised to descend on Jews and their sons and daughters, it was applicable to them in the circumstances in which they then were. The only hope of lost sinners is in the promises of God, and the only thing that can give comfort to a soul that is convicted of sin is the hope that God will pardon and save.

Unto you - To you Jews, even though you have crucified the Messiah. The promise had special reference to the Jewish people.

To your children - In Joel, to their sons and daughters, who would, nevertheless, be old enough to prophesy. Similar promises occur in Isa 44:3, "I will pour my Spirit on thy seed, and my blessing on thine offspring"; and in Isa 59:21, "My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’ s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and forever."In these and similar places their descendants or posterity are denoted. It does not refer merely to children as children, and should not be adduced as applicable exclusively to infants. It is a promise I to parents that the blessings of salvation shall not be confined to parents, but shall be extended also to their posterity. Under this promise parents may be encouraged to train up their children for God; they are authorized to devote them to him in the ordinance of Christian baptism, and they may trust in his gracious purpose thus to perpetuate the blessings of salvation from age to age.

To all - To the whole race; not limited to Jews.

Afar off - To those in other lands. It is probable that Peter here referred to the Jews who were scattered in other nations; for he does not seem yet to have understood that the gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles. See Acts 10: Yet the promise was equally applicable to the Gentiles as the Jews, and the apostles were afterward brought so to understand it, Acts 10; Rom 10:12, Rom 10:14-20; 11. The Gentiles are sometimes clearly indicated by the expression "afar off Eph 2:13, Eph 2:17; and they are represented as having been brought nigh by the blood of Christ. The phrase is equally applicable to those who have been far off from God by their sins and their evil affections. To them also the promise is extended if they will return.

Even as many ... - The promise is not to those who do not hear the gospel, nor to those who do not obey it; but it is to those to whom God in his gracious providence shall send it. He has the power and right to pardon. The meaning of Peter is, that the promise is ample, full, free; that it is suited to all, and may be applied to all; that there is no defect or lack in the provisions or promises, but that God may extend it to whomsoever he pleases. We see here how ample and full are the offers of mercy. God is hot limited in the provisions of his grace; but the plan is applicable to all mankind. It is also the purpose of God to send it to all people, and he has given a solemn charge to his church to do it. We cannot reflect but with deep pain on the fact that, although these provisions have been made - fully made; that they are adapted to all people; but that yet they have been extended by his people to so small a portion of the human family. If the promise of life is to all, it is the duty of the church to send to all the message of mercy.

Barnes: Act 2:40

Many other words - This discourse, though one of the longest in the New Testament, is but an outline. It contains, however, the substance of the plan of salvation, and is admirably arranged to attain its object.

Testify - Bear witness to. He bore witness to the promises of Christianity; to the truths pertaining to the danger of sinners; and to the truth respecting the character of that generation.

Exhort - He entreated them by arguments and promises.

Save yourselves - This expression here denotes, preserve yourselves from the influence, opinions, and fate of this generation. It implies that they were to use diligence and effort to deliver themselves. God deals with people as free agents. He calls upon them to put forth their own power and effort to be saved. Unless they put forth their own strength, they will never be saved. When they are saved, they will ascribe to God the praise for having inclined them to seek him, and for the grace whereby they are saved.

This generation - This age or race of people; the Jews then living. They were not to apprehend danger from them from which they were to deliver themselves; but they were to apprehend danger from being with them, united in their plans; designs, and feelings. From the influence of their opinions, etc., they were to escape. That generation was signally corrupt and wicked. See Matt. 23; Mat 12:39; Mat 16:4; Mar 8:38. They had crucified the Messiah; and they were, for their sins, soon to be destroyed.

Order? this untoward generation? - Untoward: "Perverse, refractory, not easily guided or taught"(Webster). The same character our Saviour had given of that generation in Mat 11:16-19. This character they had shown uniformly. They were smooth, cunning, plausible; but they were corrupt in principle, and wicked in conduct. The Pharisees had a vast hold on the people. To break away from them was to set at defiance all their power and doctrines; to alienate themselves from their teachers and friends; to brave the authority of those in office, and those who had long claimed the right of teaching and guiding the nation. The chief danger of those who were now awakened was from that generation; that they would deride, or denounce, or persecute them, and induce them to abandon their seriousness, and turn back to their sins. And hence, Peter exhorted them at once to break off from them, and give themselves to Christ. We may hence learn:

(1) That if sinners will be saved they must make an effort. There is no promise to any unless they will exert themselves.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he principal danger which besets those who are awakened arises from their former companions. They are often wicked, cunning, rich, mighty. They may be their kindred, and will seek to drive off their serious impressions by derision, or argument, or persecution. They have a powerful hold on the affections, and they will seek to use it to prevent those who are awakened from becoming Christians.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hose who are awakened should resolve at once to break off from their evil companions, and unite themselves to Christ and his people. There may be no other way in which this can be done than by resolving to forsake altogether the society of those who are infidels, and scoffers, and profane. They should forsake the world, and give themselves up to God, and resolve to have only so much contact with the world, in any respect, as may be required by duty, and as may be consistent with a supreme purpose to live to the honor of God.

Barnes: Act 2:41

They that gladly received - The word rendered "gladly"means "freely, cheerfully, joyfully."It implies that they did it without compulsion, and with joy. Religion is not compulsion. They who become Christians do it cheerfully; they do it rejoicing in the privilege of becoming reconciled to God through Jesus Christ. Though so many received his word and were baptized, yet it is implied that there were others who did not. It is probable that there were multitudes assembled who were alarmed, but who did not receive the word with joy. In all revivals there are many who become alarmed, and who are anxious about their souls, but who refuse to embrace the gospel, and again become thoughtless, and are ruined.

His word - The message which Peter had spoken respecting the pardon of sin through Jesus Christ.

Were baptized - That is, those who professed a readiness to embrace the offers of salvation. The narrative plainly implies that this was done the same day. Their conversion was instantaneous. The demand on them was to yield themselves at once to God. And their profession was made, and the ordinance which sealed their profession administered without delay.

And the same day - The discourse of Peter commenced at nine o’ clock in the morning, Act 2:15. How long it continued it is not said; but the ceremony of admitting them to the church and of baptizing them was evidently performed on the same day. The mode in which this is done is not mentioned; but it is highly improbable that in the midst of the city of Jerusalem three thousand persons were wholly immersed in one day. The whole narrative supposes that it was all done in the city; and yet there is no probability that there were conveniences there for immersing so many persons in a single day. Besides, in the ordinary way of administering baptism by immersion, it is difficult to conceive that so many persons could have been immersed in so short a time. There is, indeed, here no positive proof that they were not immersed; but the narrative is one of those incidental circumstances often much more satisfactory than philological discussion, that show the extreme improbability that all this was done by wholly immersing them in water. It may be further remarked that here is an example of very quick admission to the church. It was the first great work of grace under the gospel. It was the model of all revivals of religion. And it was doubtless intended that this should be a specimen of the manner in which the ministers of religion should act in regard to admissions to the Christian church. Prudence is indeed required; but this example furnishes no warrant for advising those who profess their willingness to obey Jesus Christ, to delay uniting with the church. If persons give evidence of piety, of true hatred of sin, and of attachment to the Lord Jesus; they should unite themselves to his people without delay.

There were added - To the company of disciples, or to the followers of Christ.

Souls - Persons. Compare 1Pe 3:20; Gen 12:5. It is not affirmed that all this took place in one part of Jerusalem, or that it was all done at once; but it is probable that this was what was afterward ascertained to be the fruit of this day’ s labor, the result of this revival of religion. This was the first effusion of the Holy Spirit under the preaching of the gospel; and it shows that such scenes are to be expected in the church, and that the gospel is suited to work a rapid and mighty change in the hearts of people.

Barnes: Act 2:42

And they continued stedfastly - They persevered in, or they adhered to. This is the inspired record of the result. That any of these apostatized is nowhere recorded, and is not to be presumed. Though they had been suddenly converted; though they were suddenly admitted to the church; though they were exposed to much persecution and contempt, and to many trials, yet the record is that they adhered to the doctrines and duties of the Christian religion. The word rendered "continued stedfastly"- προσκαρτεροῦντες proskarterountes - means "attending one, remaining by his side, not leaving or forsaking him."

The apostles’ doctrine - This does not mean that they held or believed the doctrines of the apostles, though that was true; but it means that they adhered to, or attended on, their teaching or instruction. The word doctrine has now a technical sense, and means a collection and arrangement of abstract views supposed to be contained in the Bible. In the Scriptures the word means simply "teaching"; and the expression here denotes that they continued to attend on their instructions. One evidence of conversion is a desire to be instructed in the doctrines and duties of religion, and a willingness to attend on the preaching of the gospel.

And fellowship - The word rendered "fellowship," κοινωνία koinōnia , is often rendered "communion."It properly denotes "having things in common, or participation, society, friendship."It may apply to anything which may be possessed in common, or in which all may partake. Thus, all Christians have the same hope of heaven; the same joys; the same hatred of sin; the same enemies to contend with. Thus, they have the same subjects of conversation, of feeling, and of prayer; or they have communion in these things. And thus the early Christians had their property in common. The word here may apply to either or to all of these things to their conversation, their prayers, their dangers, or their property; and means that they were united to the apostles, and participated with them in whatever befell them. It may be added that the effect of a revival of religion is to unite Christians more and more, and to bring those who were before separated to union and love. Christians feel that they are a band of brethren, and that, however much they were separated before they became Christians, now they have great and important interests in common; they are united in feelings, in interests, in dangers, in conflicts, in opinions, and in the hopes of a blessed immortality.

Breaking of bread - The Syriac renders this "the eucharist"or the Lord’ s Supper. It cannot, however, be determined whether this refers to their partaking of their ordinary food together, or to feasts of charity, or to the Lord’ s Supper. The bread of the Hebrews was made commonly into cakes, thin, hard, and brittle, so that it was broken instead of being cut. Hence, to denote "intimacy or friendship,"the phrase "to break bread together"would be very expressive in the same way as the Greeks denoted it by drinking together, συμπόσιον sumposion . From the expression used in Act 2:44, compare with Act 2:46, that they had all things common, it would rather seem to be implied that this referred to the participation of their ordinary meals. The action of breaking bread was commonly performed by the master or head of a family immediately after asking a blessing (Lightfoot).

In prayers - This was one effect of the influence of the Spirit, and an evidence of their change. A genuine revival will be always followed by a love of prayer.

Barnes: Act 2:43

And fear came - That is, there was great reverence or awe. The multitude had just before derided them Act 2:13; but so striking and manifest was the power of God on this occasion, that it silenced all clamors, and produced a general veneration and awe. The effect of a great work of God’ s grace is commonly to produce an unusual seriousness and solemnity in a community, even among those who are not converted. It restrains, subdues, and silences opposition.

Every soul - Every person or individual; that is, upon the people generally; not only on those who became Christians, but upon the multitudes who witnessed these things. All things were suited to produce this fear: the recent crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth; the wonders that attended that event; the events of the day of Pentecost; and the miracles performed by the apostles, were all suited to diffuse solemnity, thought, anxiety through the community.

Many wonders and signs - See the notes on Act 2:22. This was promised by the Saviour, Mar 16:17. Some of the miracles which they performed are specified in the following chapters.

Barnes: Act 2:44

All that believed - That is, that believed that Jesus was the Messiah; for that was the distinguishing point by which they were known from others.

Were together - Were united; were joined in the same thing. It does not mean that they lived in the same house, but they were united in the same community, or engaged in the same thing. They were doubtless often together in the same place for prayer and praise. One of the best means for strengthening the faith of young converts is for them often to meet together for prayer, conversation, and praise.

Had all things common - That is, all their property or possessions. See Act 4:32-37; Act 5:1-10. The apostles, in the time of the Saviour, evidently had all their property in common stock, and Judas was made their treasurer. They regarded themselves as one family, having common needs, and there was no use or propriety in their possessing extensive property by themselves. Yet even then it is probable that some of them retained an interest in their property which was not supposed to be necessary to be devoted to the common use. It is evident that John thus possessed property which he retained, Joh 19:27. And it is clear that the Saviour did not command them to give up their property into a common stock, nor did the apostles enjoin it: Act 5:4, "While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold was it not in thine own power?"It was, therefore, perfectly voluntary, and was as evidently adapted to the special circumstances of the early converts. Many of them came from abroad. They were from Parthia, and Media, and Arabia, and Rome, and Africa, etc. It is probable, also, that they now remained longer in Jerusalem than they had at first proposed; and it is not at all improbable that they would be denied now the usual hospitalities of the Jews, and excluded from their customary kindness, because they had embraced Jesus of Nazareth, who had been just put to death. In these circumstances, it was natural and proper that they should share their property while they remained together.

Barnes: Act 2:45

And sold - That is, they sold as much as was necessary in order to procure the means of providing for the needs of each other.

Possessions - Property, particularly real estate. This word, κτήματα ktēmata , refers properly to their fixed property, as lands, houses, vineyards, etc. The word rendered "goods," ὑπάρξεις huparxeis , refers to their personal or movable "property."

And parted them to all - They distributed them to supply the needs of their poorer brethren, according to their necessities.

As every man had need - This expression limits and fixes the meaning of what is said before. The passage does not mean that they sold all their possessions, or that they relinquished their title to all their property, but that they so far regarded all as common as to be willing to part with it if it was needful to supply the needs of the others. Hence, the property was laid at the disposal of the apostles, and they were desired to distribute it freely to meet the needs of the poor, Act 4:34-35.

This was an important incident in the early propagation of religion, and it may suggest many useful reflections:

1. We see the effect of religion. The love of property is one of the strongest affections which people have. There is nothing that will overcome it but religion. That will; and one of the first effects of the gospel was to loosen the hold of Christians on property.

2. It is the duty of the church to provide for the needs of its poor and needy members. There can be no doubt that property should now be regarded as so far common as that the needs of the poor should be supplied by those who are rich. Compare Mat 26:11.

3. If it be asked why the early disciples evinced this readiness to part with their property in this manner, it may be replied:

(1)    That the apostles had done it before them. The family of the Saviour had all things common.

(2)\caps1     i\caps0 t was the nature of religion to do it.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 he circumstances of the persons assembled on this occasion were such as to require it. They were many of them from distant regions, and probably many of them of the poorer class of the people in Jerusalem. In this they evinced what should be done in behalf of the poor in the church at all times.

4. If it be asked whether this was done commonly among the early Christians, it may be replied that there is no evidence that it was. It is mentioned here, and in Act 4:32-37, and Act 5:1-7. It does not appear that it was done even by all who were afterward converted in Judea; and there is no evidence that it was done in Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Philippi, Rome, etc. That the effect of religion was to make people liberal and willing to provide for the poor there can be no doubt. See 2Co 8:19; 2Co 9:2; 1Co 16:2; Gal 2:10. But there is no proof that it was common to part with their possessions and to lay them at the feet of the apostles. Religion does not contemplate, evidently, that people should break up all the arrangements in society, but it contemplates that those who have property should be ready and willing to part with it for the help of the poor and needy.

5. If it be asked, then, whether all the arrangements of property should be broken up now, and believers have all things in common, we are prepared to answer "No."Because:

(1)    This was an extraordinary case.

(2)\caps1     i\caps0 t was not even enjoined by the apostles on them.

(3)\caps1     i\caps0 t was practiced nowhere else.

(4)\caps1     i\caps0 t would be impracticable. No community where all things were held in common has long prospered. It has been attempted often, by pagans, by infidels, and by fanatical sects of Christians. It ends soon in anarchy, licentiousness, idleness, and profligacy; or the more cunning secure the mass of the property, and control the whole. Until all people are made alike, there could be no hope of such a community; and if there could be, it would not be desirable. God evidently intended that people should be excited to industry by the hope of gain; and then he demands that their gains shall be devoted to his service. Still, this was a noble instance of Christian generosity, and evinced the power of religion in loosing the hold which people commonly have on the world. It rebukes also those professors of religion, of whom, alas, there are many, who give nothing to benefit either the souls or bodies of their fellow-men.

Barnes: Act 2:46

With one accord - Compare Act 1:14; Act 2:1.

In the temple - This was the public place of worship; and the disciples were not disposed to leave the place where their fathers had so long worshipped God. This does not mean that they were constantly in the temple, but only at the customary hours of prayer - at nine o’ clock in the morning, and at three o’ clock in the afternoon.

And breaking bread - See the notes on Act 2:42.

From house to house - In the margin, "at home."So the Syriac and Arabic. The common interpretation, however, is, that they did it in their various houses, now in this and now in that, as might be convenient. If it refers to their ordinary meals, then it means that they partook in common of what they possessed, and the expression "did eat their meat"seems to imply that this refers to their common meals, and not to the Lord’ s Supper.

Did eat their meat - Did partake of their food. The word "meat"with us is applied to "flesh."In the Bible, and in Old English authors, it is applied to "provisions"of any kind. Here it means all kinds of sustenance; what nourished them - τροφῆς trophēs - and the use of this word proves that it does not refer to the Lord’ s Supper; for that ordinance is nowhere represented as designed for an ordinary meal, or to nourish the body. Compare 1Co 11:33-34.

With gladness - With rejoicing. This is one of the effects of religion. It is far from gloom; it diffuses happiness over the mind; it bestows additional joy in the participation of even our ordinary pleasures.

Singleness of heart - This means with a sincere and pure heart. They were satisfied and thankful. They were not perplexed or anxious; nor were they solicitous for the luxurious living, or aspiring after the vain objects of the people of the world. Compare Rom 12:8; 2Co 1:12; Col 3:22; Eph 6:5.

Barnes: Act 2:47

Praising God - See Luk 24:53.

And having favour - See Luk 2:52.

With all the people - That is, with the great mass of the people; with the people generally. It does not mean that all the people had become reconciled to Christianity; but their humble, serious, and devoted lives won the favor of the great mass of the community, and silenced opposition and cavil. This was a remarkable effect, but God has power to silence opposition; and there it nothing so well suited to do this as the humble and consistent lives of his friends.

And the Lord added - See Act 5:14; Act 11:24, etc. It was the Lord who did this. There was no power in man to do it; and the Christian loves to trace all increase of the church to the grace of God.

Added - Caused, or inclined them to be joined to the church.

The church - To the assembly of the followers of Christ - τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ tē ekklēsia . The word rendered "church"properly means "those who are called out,"and is applied to Christians as being called out, or separated from the world. It is used only three times in the gospels, Mat 16:18; Mat 18:17, twice. It occurs frequently in other parts of the New Testament, and usually as applied to the followers of Christ. Compare Act 5:11; Act 7:38; Act 8:1, Act 8:3; Act 9:31; Act 11:22, Act 11:26; Act 12:1, Act 12:5, etc. It is used in Classic writers to denote "an assembly"of any kind, and is twice thus used in the New Testament Act 19:39, Act 19:41, where it is translated "assembly."

Such as should be saved - This whole phrase is a translation of a participle - τοὺς σωζομένους tous sōzomenous . It does not express any purpose that they should be saved, but simply the fact that they were those who would be, or who were about to be saved. It is clear, however, from this expression, that those who became members of the church were those who continued to adorn their profession, or who gave proof that they were sincere Christians. It is implied here, also, that those who are to be saved will join themselves to the church of God. This is everywhere required; and it constitutes one evidence of piety when they are willing to face the world, and give themselves at once to the service of the Lord Jesus. Two remarks may be made on the last verse of this chapter; one is, that the effect of a consistent Christian life will be to command the respect of the world; and the other is, that the effect will be continually to increase the number of those who shall be saved. In this case they were daily added to it; the church was constantly increasing; and the same result may be expected in all cases where there is similar zeal, self-denial, consistency, and prayer.

We have now contemplated the foundation of the Christian church and the first glorious revival of religion. This chapter deserves to be profoundly studied by all ministers of the gospel, as well as by all who pray for the prosperity of the kingdom of God. It should excite our fervent gratitude that God has left this record of the first great work of grace, and our earnest prayers that He would multiply and extend such scenes until the earth shall be filled with His glory.

Poole: Act 2:27

My soul that is, me: the soul is put for the person, as Rom 13:1 , Let every soul be subject; and sometimes for a dead body, as Lev 19:28 Num 5:2 , and in divers other places, vpg that signifies a soul, is so used.

In hell the word adhv is put either for the grave, or for the place of the damned. Being these words are alleged as a proof of Christ’ s resurrection, and that our Saviour’ s soul was certainly in paradise, where he promised to the penitent thief that he should be with him, it seems rather to be meant of the grave, which, according to this prophecy, could not hold our blessed Saviour’ s body so long as that it should corrupt in it. If David by his soul here did mean our Saviour, because he was as it were the soul of his soul, and life of his life, it shows how he did, and how we ought to value him.

Thine Holy One as being anointed, sanctified, and sent by God.

Poole: Act 2:28

Thou hast made known to me God is frequently said to make those mercies known to us which he bestows upon us.

The ways of life of a true life, which is life indeed. David in these words celebrates God’ s delivering of him from his grievous afflictions and exile; in which he was looked upon by others, and by himself, as a dead man, yet was brought again to see the temple, and enjoy the ordinances of God, without which his life was as no life unto him. So our Saviour, after his death and passion, arose, and ascended into heaven, and lives for ever to make intercession for us.

With thy countenance that is, with thy presence, or manifestation of thy love and favour.

Poole: Act 2:29

Men and brethren St. Peter bespeaks this attention and favour, intimating he was one of the same nation with themselves, than which nothing could more recommend him. David was had in great veneration, and his memory very precious amongst this people, as was Abraham’ s, Isaac’ s, and Jacob’ s; who were the chief of their fathers.

He is both dead and buried as in 1Ki 2:10 , and elsewhere, is recorded of him, which they firmly believed.

His sepulchre or monument, is with us either not wholly spoiled by the barbarous enemies, who had destroyed Jerusalem; or rather repaired after the captivity, to keep up the memory of so great and good a man. But by this it appeared, that David did not speak these things concerning himself, who must needs have seen corruption, (themselves being witnesses), for on that account they respected his tomb, as being the repository of his ashes.

Poole: Act 2:30

Had sworn with an oath not barely had sworn, which had been sufficient; but to show the excellency of the matter, and the necessity of our believing of it, as also the solemnity of the words, Psa 132:11 .

Of the fruit of his loins such as should descend from him, as the virgin Mary did.

According to the flesh as to his human nature, which our Saviour did truly partake of, being in the form of a servant.

He would raise up Christ by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of his virgin mother, as to his incarnation; and by the same power out of the grave, in his resurrection.

To sit on his throne as Luk 1:32,33 : not as a temporal king, for his kingdom is not of this world; but as David ruled over all the people of God, so does Christ, and shall do for ever.

Poole: Act 2:31

He seeing this before by a prophetical eye, unto which any thing that was revealed was as certain and manifest, as aught could be to the eye of the body. By the same prophetical Spirit, and with the same certainty, which he space of the incarnation, he

spake also of the resurrection of Christ Of the rest, see Act 2:27 .

Poole: Act 2:32

This Jesus whom ye crucified, and we preach,

Whereof we all are witnesses: they had now received the power spoken of and promised Act 1:6 , and testify what they had heard, and seen, and felt, and all agree in; though they could get nothing by it, but hatred and persecution, nay, death.

Poole: Act 2:33

By the right hand of God that is, by the power of God spoken after the manner of men, the right hand being that we commonly do any thing with. Some read at the right hand of God; and then the apostle preaches Christ’ s ascension too, and his being justified by God, though he had been condemned by men.

Having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost: Psa 68:18

Which ye now see in the fiery cloven tongues; and hear in the divers languages which are spoken.

Poole: Act 2:34

For David is not ascended into the heavens hence St. Peter here proves, that these words, spoken by David, were not principally to be understood concerning himself, but concerning Christ the Messiah; for David, as to his body, was in the sepulchre, which on that account was kept amongst them.

The Lord said unto my Lord the eternal Father unto his eternal Son, who was now made flesh— hence our Saviour proves his Divinity, Mat 22:45 . The words here referred to are Psa 110:1 .

Poole: Act 2:35

Christ is commissioned and empowered to reign over and govern all creatures, and all their actions, till the consummation of all things, so long as the world lasts, in which he, his people, and truths, will have enemies, Eph 1:20-22 1Co 15:27,28 .

Poole: Act 2:36

This is the conclusion which the apostle infers from the premises, applying what he had said very close and home, or it would not in all likelihood have had so good an effect.

Ye have crucified ye are the men.

Lord over all the creatures, beyond what the first Adam was; and Christ King over all the people of God, to rule in them, and reign for them; for to this purpose he was the Christ, or the Anointed of God, declared by God to be so, and owned for such by all that believed in him.

Poole: Act 2:37

They were pricked in their heart so great and true their grief, they were concerned as if they had been run through: (the pains the mind suffer are most acute): this was foretold, Zec 12:10 .

Men and brethren an ordinary compellation which the apostle had given them, Act 2:29 .

What shall we do? not, What shall we say, or believe? Conversion, if real, goes further than profession, and is in heart and deed, not in speech and word only: they desire to know if there be any hope, that such sinners as they might obtain forgiveness of their sins.

Poole: Act 2:38

Repent which includes amendment of life, Mat 3:8 Luk 3:8 . In the name of Jesus Christ not excluding the name of the Father and the Holy Ghost, in whose name, as well as in the name of the Son, they were to baptize, Mat 28:19 : but the name of Jesus is here mentioned, because they had not yet known (but persecuted and slain) him, whom henceforward they must profess; and that they look for pardon and salvation only through him. For the remission of sins thus Saul, or Paul, is said to wash away his sins by baptism, Act 22:16 ; and this apostle elsewhere says, that baptism saves us, 1Pe 3:21 ; which he explains to be, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience, & c. The gift of the Holy Ghost:

1. His internal gifts, confirmation and strengthening in the faith.

2. External gifts, as that of speaking with tongues, which they heard. Both, or either of these, according to their conditions or stations, God would bestow upon them.

Poole: Act 2:39

For the promise is unto you lest they should doubt of pardon and grace, their sin having been so great. St. Peter gives them a ground of hope, they being the descendants from Abraham, unto whom especially this was promised, Jer 31:34 .

And to all that are afar off that is, to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews, who were said to be a people near unto God, as the Gentiles were said to be afar off, Isa 57:19 Eph 2:13 .

Even as many as the Lord our God shall call vocation, whether external by the word only, or internal by the Spirit also, depends on the pleasure of God; but the same promises of pardon and acceptance upon repentance made unto the Jews, are as effectually to be trusted unto by any of the Gentiles, as by any formerly amongst the Jews.

Poole: Act 2:40

Many other words: the sermons of the apostles, or of our Saviour, are not all set down by the holy writers; but only so much as God saw necessary for his church to know and believe.

Testify and exhort using God’ s name and authority, and calling him as it were to witness.

Save yourselves: no less than the salvation of our souls depends upon our forsaking wicked and profane persons in their ungodly courses.

From this untoward generation; the whole world lies in wickedness; but especially the scribes and Pharisees, and other such declared enemies of Christ Jesus.

Poole: Act 2:41

They that gladly received his word some still remained in their unbelief and hardness of heart; though never men spake as the apostles now spake, with divers tongues, &c.

Unto them to the church, or the hundred and twenty formerly mentioned, Act 1:15 . This was the effect of Christ’ s prayer for his persecutors, Luk 23:34 ; and of the promise of the Spirit now fulfilled, whereby in the day of his power they were made willing.

Poole: Act 2:42

They continued stedfastly speaks the reality of their conversion, and that they were not only for the present affected with what they had heard and seen. These three parts of worship were frequently, if not always, in those purer times used together: though some understand by breaking of bread, their civil fellowship and community, yet breaking being a holy rite used by our Saviour, at the institution of his supper, Mat 26:26 , and breaking of bread being here put in conjunction with preaching and praying, the celebration of the eucharist, if not only meant, is chiefly to he understood in this place.

Prayers all those kinds of prayers mentioned by St. Paul, 1Ti 2:1 , as also their frequent praying, is implied. Thus, by a united force, they laboured to pull down mercies upon themselves and others, and to do violence unto the kingdom of heaven.

Poole: Act 2:43

Upon every soul that is, upon every man; not only on them that were present, and persuaded to believe on Christ, whom the apostles preached; but on such also as were informed of those miraculous things which now happened; so that by this means the apostles were had in great esteem and respect by the people.

Poole: Act 2:44

All that believed were together not that they lived together in one house or street, but that they met (and that frequently) together in the holy exercises of their religion; and that manner of some, which St. Paul speaks of, Heb 10:25 , to forsake the assembling of themselves together, was a sin not yet known in the church.

And had all things common this was only at that place, Jerusalem, and at that time, when the wants of some, and the charity of others, may well be presumed to be extraordinary; and there is no such thing as community of goods here required or practised. Christ’ s gospel does not destroy the law; and the eighth commandment is still in force, which it could not be, if there were no propriety, or meum and tuum, now; nay, after this, the possession which Ananias sold is adjudged by this apostle to have been Ananias’ s own, and so was the money too which he had received for it, Act 5:4 . And these all things which they had in common, must either be restrained to such things as every one freely laid aside for the poor; or that it speaks the extraordinary charitable disposition of those new converts, that they would rather have parted with any thing, nay, with their all, than that any of their poor brethren should have wanted.

Poole: Act 2:45

Those proportions of their estate they set apart to this charitable work; whether they did arise out of the sale of house or land, called

possessions or of any chattels or movable estate, called here goods: but that they did not divest themselves of all property, appears in that we find soon after this, Act 12:12 , Mary the mother of St. Mark to have a house; and Lydia, after she was baptized, did not renounce any propriety in her house, Act 16:15 , but entreated St. Paul, and those who were with him, to come into her house, &c.

Poole: Act 2:46

In the temple in the court and porches of the temple, whither the people did use to resort at the time of the morning and evening sacrifice and prayers, that by means of the great concourse at such times they might have the better opportunity to preach the gospel amongst them; casting that net where they found most fish.

Breaking bread not only celebrating the eucharist, but their love feasts which they usually had at that time, as 1Co 11:21,22 .

From house to house now here, now there, as they could conveniently; the richer also entertaining their poorer brethren at their tables.

Did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart: if the former words be understood of the Lord’ s supper, then these words speak the great spiritual strength, cheer, and comfort they got by it: if we understand them of the ordinary meats which they willingly bestowed one upon another, the rich were more than recompensed with inward peace and satisfaction, for what they gave unto their poor brethren.

Poole: Act 2:47

Praising God acknowledging him who teacheth one to want, and another to abound.

Having favour with all the people that is, generally to be understood, amongst them that continued yet without the pale of the church; the goodness, meekness, and patience of the apostles, and the rest of the believers, did wonderfully prevail to beget a good opinion of them.

The Lord added to the church salvation is (to be sure) only from the Lord; not Peter’ s sermons, no, nor the miracles of fiery cloven tongues, and the rushing mighty wind, could have converted any, but Dei ti endon , that which was signified there, viz. the powerful operation of the Spirit of God in their hearts.

PBC: Act 2:39

Each term carries its unique meaning. The final description, the catchall phrase that richly instructs us, qualifies the recipient of the gospel. " For the promise is unto..., even as many as the Lord our God shall call." Peter addressed his sermon to those whom the Lord calls. We should do likewise.

Haydock: Act 2:27

Thou wilt not leave [3] my soul in hell. This is also the Protestant translation; and the manner in which Beza translates it, is both very false and ridiculous, thou shalt not leave my carcass in the grave. For allowing that the Latin and Greek word, which is here translated hell, may signify sometimes, the grave; yet no excuse can be made for putting carcass, where the Greek, as well as Latin, signifies the soul. And for the doctrine of Christ's descending into hell, even the learned Dr. Pearson on the Creed, observes with Catholics, that the article of the creed, wherein we say, he descended into hell, cannot be the same as to say, his body descended into the grave, because in the foregoing words we profess that he was dead and buried. (Witham) ---

Beza plainly confesseth that he translateth the text thus: Thou shalt not leave my carcass in the grave, against the doctrine of purgatory, and Christ's descending into hell, although he alloweth, that most of the ancient Fathers were in that error. Thus opposing himself to plain Scripture and to the ancient Fathers, perverting the former, and contemning the latter, to overthrow an article of the apostles' creed. ( He descended into hell. New Test. in 1556.)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

My soul in hell. Animam meam in Inferno, Greek: ten psuchen mou eis adou.

====================

Haydock: Act 2:31

Foreseeing he (David) spoke of the resurrection of Christ. St. Peter shews them that the prophetical words of the Psalm, agree not to David in person, he being dead, and his body having remained in the grave, without rising from the dead. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 2:33

He hath poured forth this, which we see, and hear, by the effects, by the noise, as it were of thunder, by our speaking languages, &c. (Witham) ---

It does not appear that the holy Spirit was visible to the multitude, whom St. Peter addressed. But they perceived sensible marks of his presence, in the great noise, which had called them together, and the divers tongues spoken by illiterate men, who had never studied. (Haydock)

Haydock: Act 2:37

They had compunction in their heart, with sorrow for their sins, especially against their Messias. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 2:38

Be baptized: believing and making profession to believe, and hope for salvation, by the merits of Jesus Christ. Thus you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, the grace of God, and perhaps those other gifts of speaking with tongues, working miracles, &c. (Witham) ---

The gift of the Holy Ghost. That is, justifying grace, which is infused in our hearts by the laver of regeneration. The exterior gifts of the Holy Ghost, the gifts of tongues, of miracles, prophecy, &c. were, in the beginning of the Church, more regularly the consequence of confirmation or imposition of hands. (Calmet)

Haydock: Act 2:39

The promise is to you. The good tidings of salvation were first announced to the Jew, then to the Gentile; first to the domestics, then to the strangers, who are far off. It is rather singular, that St. Peter, after here so clearly shewing that the Gentiles are called to the faith, should afterwards have made such objections to go to baptize Cornelius, because he was a Gentile. This can only be reconciled, by supposing, he did not know distinctly the time nor the manner of their vocation. (Calmet)

Haydock: Act 2:40

And with a great many other words did he testify and exhort them. St. Luke only gives an abridgment of those exhortations, which St. Peter, and the apostles frequently gave to all the people. St. Peter, as St. John Chrysostom observes, and as we see in these Acts, was the mouth of all the rest. And on this first day of Pentecost, about three thousand were converted. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 2:42

In the communication of the breaking of bread, by which some understand their ordinary meals, and eating together; others, of the celestial bread of the holy Sacrament, Greek: tou arton, panis illius, scilicet Eucharistiæ. The Eucharist is called both by St. Luke and St. Paul, the breaking of bread. (Menochius, in ver. 42. and 46.) ---

In the Syriac, for Greek: artou, is a term that means Eucharist, both here and in Acts xx. as the learned Joannes Harlemius remarks in Indice Bibliorum. ---

St. Luke also gives here some account of the manner of living of these first Christians. 1. They were together, united in perfect charity. 2. They were frequently in the temple, and praying together. 3. They had all possessions in common. 4. they went from house to house to convert souls, taking the food they found with joy, and simplicity of heart, their number daily increasing. 5. St. Luke says they were in favour, and esteemed by all the people. 6. The apostles did many prodigies and miracles, to confirm their doctrine, which struck others with great terror and horror for their past lives. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 2:44

This living in common is not a precept for all Christians, but a life of perfection and counsel, for such as are called to it by heaven. See St. Augustine in Psalm cxii. and ep. cix. the practice of which is a striking proof of the one true Church, which has come down from the apostles.

Haydock: Act 2:46

In the temple. Although by the death of our Saviour, the ceremonies and sacrifices were abrogated, and the new alliance had succeeded to the old, still it was not in the design of God, that the faithful should separated themselves from the rest of the Jews, or entirely give up the observances of the law. They continued to observe them, as long as the utility of the Church required it, but they observed them not as Jews. Thus they avoided giving scandal to the weak, and driving them from submitting to the doctrines of the Church. They disposed them insensibly to a more pure and spiritual worship. (St. John Chrysostom, in Act. hom. vii.) ---

This was burying the synagogue with honour.

Haydock: Act 2:47

More and more he added daily to the Church, as it is clearly expressed in the Greek, prosetithei te ekklesia, that we may see the visible propagation and increase of the same. We may here, and throughout the whole book, observe a visible society of men joined in Christ, which visible society may be traced through ecclesiastical history, down to our days, and which will continue, in virtue of Christ's promise, to the end of time, as the point of union, by which the true disciples of Jesus Christ are to be connected together in one body, and one spirit; "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." (Ephesians iv. 5.) This book can shew the true Church ever visible, and ever speaking with authority to all that do not willingly shut their eyes, as plainly as the gospel doth shew the true Christ. "Every where the Church proclaims the truth; she is the candlestick, with the seven lamps (Exodus xxv.); bearing the light of Christ, Greek: eptamukos, " says St. Irenæus; which light nothing can obscure. Hence St. John Chrysostom says, "sooner shall the sun be extinguished, than the Church be obscured;" Greek: eukolioteron ton elion sbesthenai, e ten ekklesian aphanisthenai.

Gill: Act 2:27

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell,.... This is an apostrophe, or an address to his Father, who he believed would not leave his soul, as separate from his body, in Hades, in the invisible world of souls, in the place where the souls of departed saints are, but would quickly return it to its body, and reunite them; or else, that he would not leave his dead body, for so נפש sometimes signifies; see Lev 19:28 in the grave; which is no unusual sense of שאול; see Gen 42:38 that is, so long as to be corrupted and putrefy, as the next clause shows:

neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. The character of an "Holy One" well agrees with Christ, both as God, or with respect to his divine nature, holiness being a perfection in it, and in which he is glorious; and as man, he being holy in his nature, harmless in his life and conversation: all his doctrines were pure and holy, and so were all his works; and all his administrations in the discharge of every of his office; and he is the efficient cause and lain of all the holiness of his people; they are sanctified in him, and by him, and have all their sanctification from him. The word may be rendered, "thy merciful", or "bountiful one"; and such Christ is, a merciful, as well as faithful high priest; and who has shown great compassion both to the bodies and souls of men, and has been very beneficent and liberal in the distributions of his grace and goodness. Now, though he died, and was laid in the grave, and buried, yet God would not suffer him to lie there so long as to be corrupted and putrefied, which is the sense of seeing corruption: and so the Jews themselves explain the last clause of the preceding verse, in connection with this, "my flesh shall rest in hope", that no worm or maggot should have power over it, or corrupt it,

"Seven fathers (they say ^x) dwell in eternal glory, and there is no רמה ותולעה, "worm or maggot", rules over them; and these are they, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses, and Aaron, and Amram their father; and there are that say also David, as it is said, Psa 16:1, "therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth, my flesh also shall rest in hope".

And which sense also is mentioned by one of their commentators of note ^y, who thus paraphrases the words:

"whilst I am alive it shall rest safely, for thou wilt deliver me from all hurt; and in the mystical sense, or according to the Midrash, after death; intimating, that no maggot or worm should have power over him;

which was not true of David, but is of the Messiah,

Gill: Act 2:28

Thou hast made known to me the ways of life,.... That is, thou hast raised me from the dead. When God raised Christ from the dead, he showed him, or made him to know experimentally the way of life, or the way of the resurrection from death to life; and this path of life, or of the resurrection to an immortal and eternal life, was first shown to Christ, who is the first fruits of them that slept, and the first begotten from the dead,

Thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance; or glorious presence, in which is fulness of joy; which Christ, as man, is in, and fully possessed of, being exalted at the right hand of God, and crowned with glory and honour, and has all the joy that was set before him in his sufferings and death.

Gill: Act 2:29

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you,.... The apostle calls the Jews, brethren, whom he before only styled men of Judea, and men of Israel, because they were his brethren according to the flesh, as many of them afterwards were in a spiritual relation; and the rather he adds this affectionate appellation to soften their minds, and prepare them to receive the account he was about to give of David, and of his prophecy of the Messiah, and his resurrection; in which he used much freedom of speech, consistent with truth, good sense, and strong reasoning; which he thought might be allowed to take, and they would not be displeased at, in discoursing to them

of the patriarch David; who was a "head of the fathers", as the Syriac and Arabic versions render it; a prince of the tribes of Israel; one of the greatest kings the tribes of Israel ever had; and therefore this name well becomes him; though it is more commonly given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the heads of the twelve tribes:

that he is both dead, and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day; it is a plain case, and a certain matter of fact, which nobody disputes or denies, that David really died, and was laid in the grave, and that his monument, or tomb, was still extant, so that he was not risen from the dead; and therefore the above citation could not respect him, but another, even the Messiah, and had been literally fulfilled in Jesus. The Jews say ^z, that David died on the day of Pentecost; which was the very day on which Peter was now preaching; he was buried in Jerusalem, and his sepulchral monument was in being when Peter said these words. And Josephus relates ^a, that the sepulchre of David was opened by Hyrcanus, who took out of it three thousand talents; and that it was afterwards opened by Herod ^b: which, if true, may serve to render credible what Peter says concerning its continuance to that day. Though it may be questioned whether any such treasure was ever in it, or taken out of it; and still less credible is the account which R. Benjamin ^c gives of two men in his time, who, under the wall of Zion, found a cave, which led them to a large palace built on pillars of marble, and covered with gold and silver; and within it was a table, and a golden sceptre, and a crown of gold; and this, says the author, was the sepulchre of David, king of Israel,

Gill: Act 2:30

Therefore being a prophet,.... Who could foretell things to come, as he did many things concerning the sufferings and death of Christ, and the circumstances attending it, concerning his resurrection, ascension, and session at the right hand of God. So the title of his "Psalms", in the Syriac version, runs thus; the "Book of the Psalms of David, King and Prophet": and in the Arabic version, "the First Book of the Psalms of David the Prophet, King of the Children of Israel". Though the Jews ^d will not allow him, nor Solomon, nor Daniel, to be strictly and properly prophets, they make a difference between prophecy, and the Holy Spirit. They own, that the book of Psalms was written under the influence of the Holy Spirit, but not by prophecy; and therefore they place it among the Hagiographa, or holy writings, but not among the Prophets: though after all, Kimchi allows David to be a prophet, since he is called a man of God; for he says this name is not said of any but על נביא, "of a prophet" ^e; and Peter is right in calling him so:

and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him; as he did in Psa 132:11.

that of the fruit of his loins; of one that should be of his seed, that should spring from him, even the Virgin Mary, who was of the house and lineage of David:

according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ; would send him forth, according to the human nature; for this phrase respects not his resurrection from the dead, but his incarnation or exhibition in the flesh, as in Act 3:26. This clause is wanting in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, and in the Alexandrian copy, and should be read in a parenthesis; since it is not in the text in Psa 132:11.

to sit on his throne; on the throne of David his father; see Gill on Luk 1:32.

Gill: Act 2:31

He seeing this before,.... Or by a spirit of prophecy foreseeing it, that according to God's promise and oath, the Messiah would be raised up, and spring from his seed; and also by the same Spirit foresaw that he would suffer and die, and be laid in the grave, the pit of corruption:

spake of the resurrection of Christ; from the dead, to the sense of the following words, in Psa 16:10.

that his soul was not left in hell: neither his separate soul in Hades, nor his body in the grave,

neither his flesh did see corruption; or his body, or his "carcass", as the Syriac version renders it, did not lie so long in the grave as to rot and putrefy.

Gill: Act 2:32

This Jesus hath God raised up,.... That is, from the dead,

whereof we are all witnesses; namely, of his resurrection, they having seen him, and heard him, and ate, and drank, and conversed with him since his resurrection; and which was true, not of the twelve apostles only, but of the whole company: or "we are all his witnesses"; either of God, who raised Christ from the dead; or of Christ who was raised by him; and indeed, they bore testimony to the whole of this, to Christ, and to his resurrection, and to its being done by God the Father.

Gill: Act 2:33

Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted,.... After his resurrection he ascended to heaven, and was exalted in human nature; "to the right hand of God", as the Ethiopic version; and the Arabic version used by De Dieu read; an honour that never was conferred on any creature, angels or men, besides: or he was exalted and raised to the high honour and dignity of a Prince and Saviour, of Lord, Head, and King, so as to have a name, dominion, and authority over all, by the mighty power of God, which is sometimes called his right hand; see Psa 118:15.

and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost; which the Father had promised to pour forth in the last days, Isa 44:3 and which Christ had promised to send from the Father, Joh 14:16 and which, upon his ascension and exaltation, he received as Mediator from him; see Psa 68:18 compared with Eph 4:8.

he hath shed forth this; this Holy Spirit, or promised Spirit, these gifts of his; and so the Syriac version renders it, "he hath shed forth this gift"; which expresses both the plenty and abundance of the gifts bestowed, and the liberality of Christ in the donation of them: it is added,

which ye now see and hear; meaning the cloven tongues, as of fire, which they saw sitting on the disciples, and the various languages which they heard them speak. The Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, leave out the word "now": and the Syriac, in the room of it, reads, "behold".

Gill: Act 2:34

For David is not ascended into the heavens,.... In his body, that being still in the grave, in his sepulchre, which remained to that day, though in his soul he was ascended to heaven; his Spirit had returned to God that gave it, and was among the spirits of just men made perfect: but he saith himself, in Psa 110:1 "the Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand"; see Gill on Mat 22:44.

Gill: Act 2:35

Until I make thy foes thy footstool. See Gill on Mat 22:44.

Gill: Act 2:36

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly,.... "With certain knowledge", as the Arabic version renders it; with full assurance of it: this is a case that is plain and clear, a matter of fact that may be depended on; which all the people of Israel, called "the house of Israel", a phrase frequently used of that people in the Old Testament, which every individual of that body of men might be assured of:

that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ; that is, that God the Father had not only constituted and appointed Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah, the Lord of lords, and King of kings, and had invested him with that office, power, and authority, but he had made him manifest to be so by the Holy Spirit which he had received, and now poured forth the same, and not another; even him whom they had rejected with so much contempt; whom they had treated in such a scornful and brutish manner; had spit upon, buffeted, and scourged, and at last crucified; and yet, now, even he had all power in heaven, and in earth, given him, and was exalted above every name; that in his name every knee should bow. The phrase of "making a Messiah", or "Christ", is used in the Talmudic writings ^f,

"The holy blessed God sought to make Hezekiah the Messiah, or Christ, and Sennacherib Gog and Magog; the property or attribute of justice said before the holy blessed God, Lord of the world, and what was David, the king of Israel, who said so many songs and hymns before thee, and thou didst not make him Christ? Hezekiah, for whom thou hast done all these wonders, and he hath not said a song before thee, wilt thou make him the Messiah, or Christ? wherefore his mouth was shut up; and the earth opened, and said a song before him; Lord of the world, I have said a song before thee, for this righteous one, ועשהו משיח, and he made him Messiah, or Christ.

Gill: Act 2:37

Now when they heard this,.... Or "him", as the Arabic version; that is, Peter speaking these things, describing the character of Jesus of Nazareth; opening the prophecies concerning him; asserting his resurrection from the dead, and exaltation at the right hand of God; ascribing this wonderful affair, of speaking with divers tongues, to his effusion of the Spirit; and charging them home with the iniquity of crucifying him:

they were pricked in their hearts; the word of God entered into them, and was as a sharp sword in them, which cut and laid open their hearts, and the sin and wickedness of them; they saw themselves guilty of the crime laid to their charge, and were filled with remorse of conscience for it; they felt pain at their hearts, and much uneasiness, and were seized with horror and trembling; they were wounded in their spirits, being hewn and cut down by the prophets and apostles of the Lord, and slain by the words of his mouth; they were as dead men in their own apprehension; and indeed, a prick, a cut, or wound in the heart is mortal:

and said unto Peter, and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? the persons they before mocked at, they are glad to advise with, what should be done in this their sad and wretched case; what they should do to obtain the favour of God, the forgiveness of their sins, and everlasting salvation. Convinced, awakened sinners, are generally at first upon a covenant of works; are for doing something to atone for their past crimes, to set themselves right in the sight of God, to ingratiate themselves into his favour, and procure the pardon of their sins, and the inheritance of eternal life. And they seem also to be at a loss about the way of salvation, what is to be done to attain it, or how, and by what means it is to be come at; and are almost ready to despair of it, their sin appearing in so dreadful a light, and attended with such aggravating circumstances. Beza's ancient copy reads, "some of them said to Peter", &c. not all that heard, but those that were pricked to the heart.

Gill: Act 2:38

Then Peter said unto them,.... Being the mouth of the apostles, and being ready to give advice, and speak a word of comfort to their distressed minds:

repent: change your minds, entertain other thoughts, and a different opinion of Jesus of Nazareth, than you have done; consider him, and believe in him, as the true Messiah and Saviour of the world; look upon him, not any more as an impostor, and a blasphemer, but as sent of God, and the only Redeemer of Israel; change your voice and way of speaking of him, and your conduct towards his disciples and followers; a change of mind will produce a change of actions in life and conversation: bring forth fruits meet for repentance; and make an open and hearty profession of repentance for this your sin. And this the apostle said, to distinguish between a legal and an evangelical repentance; the former is expressed in their being pricked to the heart, on which they were not to depend; the latter he was desirous they might have, and show forth; which springs from the love of God, is attended with views, or at least hopes of pardoning grace and mercy, and with faith in Christ Jesus: it lies in a true sight and sense of sin, under the illuminations and convictions of the Spirit of God; in a sorrow for it, after a godly sort, and because it is committed against a God of love, grace, and mercy, and it shows itself in loathing sin, and in shame for it, in an ingenuous acknowledgement of it, and in forsaking it: and this is moreover urged, to show the necessity of it, as to salvation, for such that God would not have perish, he will have come to repentance; so to their admission to the ordinance of baptism, to which repentance is a pre-requisite; and to which the apostle next advises:

and be baptized everyone of you; that repents and believes; that is, in water, in which John administered the ordinance of baptism; in which Christ himself was baptized, and in which the apostles of Christ administered it; in this Philip baptized the eunuch; and in this were the persons baptized that were converted in Cornelius's house; and it is distinguished from the baptism of the Spirit, or with fire, the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit mentioned in the last clause of this verse; and which ordinance of water baptism was administered by immersion, as the places, Jordan and Aenon, where John performed it, and the instances of it particularly in Christ, and in the eunuch, and the end of it, which is to represent the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, as well as the primary signification of the word, show. And this is to be done,

in the name of Jesus Christ; not to the exclusion of the Father, and of the Spirit, in whose name also this ordinance is to be administered, Mat 28:19 but the name of Jesus Christ is particularly mentioned, because of these Jews, who had before rejected and denied him as the Messiah; but now, upon their repentance and faith, they are to be baptized in his name, by his authority, according to his command; professing their faith in him, devoting themselves to him, and calling on his name. The end for which this was to be submitted to, is,

for the remission of sins; not that forgiveness of sin could be procured either by repentance, or by baptism; for this is only obtained by the blood of Christ; but the apostle advises these awakened, sensible, repenting, and believing souls, to submit to baptism, that by it their faith might be led to Christ, who suffered and died for their sins, who left them buried in his grave, and who rose again for their justification from them; all which is, in a most lively manner, represented in the ordinance of baptism by immersion: the encouragement to it follows,

and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost: not the grace of the Spirit, as a regenerator and sanctifier; for that they had already; and is necessary, as previous to baptism; unless it should mean confirmation of that grace, and stability in it, as it appears from Act 2:42 they afterwards had; but rather the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, particularly the gift of speaking with tongues, which Christ had received from the Father, and had now shed on his apostles; see Act 19:5.

Gill: Act 2:39

Either of the Messiah, and salvation by him, which was particularly given forth to the people of the Jews; or of the remission of sins, which was a branch of the covenant made with the house of Israel, in a spiritual sense, even the whole household of God; or of the pouring forth of the Spirit: and this promise was not only to them, but to theirs, even to as many of them as belonged to the election of grace; and whom the Lord their God would effectually call by his grace, as the last and limiting clause of the text, and which is to be connected with every part of it, shows:

and to your children: this is the rather mentioned, because these awakened, and converted souls, were not only in great concern about themselves, for their sin of crucifying Christ, but were in great distress about their children, on whom they had imprecated the guilt of Christ's blood, as upon themselves; the thought of which cut them to the heart, and made their hearts bleed, within them: wherefore to relieve them, and administer comfort to them in this their distress, the apostle informs them, that the promise of Christ, and of his grace, was not only to them, who were now called, but it was also to their children; to as many of them as the Lord God should call; and who are the children of the promise, which all the children of the flesh were not, Rom 9:6 and to these the promise should be applied, notwithstanding this dreadful imprecation of theirs:

and to all that are afar off; either in place, as those that were dispersed, among the several nations of the world; and so carried in it a comfortable aspect on the multitude of Jews, that were of every nation under heaven; or in time, who should live in ages to come; or else the Gentiles are intended, who were afar off from God and Christ, and the way of life and salvation by him; see Eph 2:12 even as many as the Lord our God shall call: not externally only, by the ministry of the word, but internally, by his grace and Spirit; with that calling, which is according to the purpose and grace of God, and is inseparably connected with eternal glory; the promise is to all such, and is made good to all such, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, fathers, or children, greater or lesser sinners. The Syriac version reads, "whom God himself shall call".

Gill: Act 2:40

And with many other words did he testify and exhort,.... For Luke does not give the sermons of the apostles at length, but a compendium, or specimen of them, and some of the more remarkable things in them; and which, it seems, lay partly in testifying concerning Christ, his person, office, grace, righteousness, and salvation; and against sins and errors, and false doctrine; and in "exhorting" to the exercise of grace, and the discharge of duty; or in comforting distressed minds: for the word used signifies to comfort as well as to exhort; though it seems to have the latter sense here, since it follows:

saying, save yourselves from this untoward generation: meaning, the chief priests, Scribes, and Pharisees, and elders of the people, chiefly, who were a perverse generation of men; and upon whom, for their impenitence and unbelief, for their rejection of the Messiah, and their evil treatment of him, wrath and ruin would come upon them, to the uttermost, very quickly; wherefore the apostle exhorts to separate from them, and not partake of their sins, lest they should also of their plagues; but come out from among them, and so, in a temporal sense, save themselves from the destruction that would quickly come on their nation, city, and temple; and so the Arabic version renders it, "escape from this rough generation".

Gill: Act 2:41

Then they that gladly received his word,.... The Syriac version adds, "and believed"; what Peter said concerning repentance and baptism, and especially concerning remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; and concerning the promise of Christ, and salvation by him, of the pardon of sin, and of the Holy Spirit; which doctrine they received with great joy and gladness, it being suitable to their case; and very "readily", and "willingly", as the Syriac and Arabic versions render it; for they were now made a willing people in the day of God's power, and now that promise, or prophecy, in Psa 110:3 had a remarkable accomplishment; these converts were the dew of Christ's youth, as well as instances of his powerful and efficacious grace: not all that heard this sermon of Peter's received his doctrine in this manner, only some; and so the Syriac and Arabic versions render the words, "and some of them readily received", &c. which shows the distinguishing grace of God in this instance. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions leave out the word "gladly", which should not be omitted: and as soon as they had received the word, and were comforted by it, they

were baptized; in water, by immersion, for which there was great conveniency in Jerusalem, and in the temple, where the apostles now were: in the city of Jerusalem, in private houses, they had their baths for purifications, by immersion, as in the case of menstruous, gonorrhoeas, and other defilements, by touching unclean persons, and things, which were very frequent; so that a digger of cisterns, for such uses, and others, was a business in Jerusalem,

"Says Simeon Sicana ^g, who was a digger of cisterns, ditches, and caves, in Jerusalem, to R. Jochanan ben Zaccai, I am as great a man as thou art; he made answer to him, why? (or your reason for it;) he replied to him, because I am employed in the necessary affairs of many, (or of the public,) as you are; for says he, if a man comes to you for judgment, or to ask a question, you say to him, drink out of this cistern, whose waters are pure, and cold; or, if a woman asks thee concerning her monstrous, you say to her, טבלי, dip in this cistern, whose waters purify.

And in the temple there was an apartment, called בית טבילה, "the dipping place", or "room", where the high priest dipped himself on the day of atonement ^h: and besides, there were ten lavers of brass, made by Solomon; and every laver held forty baths of water, and each was four cubits broad and long, sufficient for immersion of the whole body of a man; and to these Herbanus ⁱ the Jew seems to have respect, when he says, that in the outer part of Solomon's temple, there were λουτηρης, "lavers", in every side, (or all around,) which were free, or open, for the use of all; to which, he thinks, the prophet Isaiah has respect, in Isa 1:16. Those were for the priests, both to wash their hands and feet at, and also to wash the burnt offerings; see Exo 30:18 ^k: and who were likewise obliged, very often, to bathe, or dip their whole bodies in water; for if a priest went out of the temple for a little while to speak with a friend, טעון טבילה, "he was obliged to dipping": and if he nodded, he was obliged to wash his hands and his feet; but if he slept, he was obliged to dip himself; yea, a man might not go into the court, or to service, even though he was clean, עד שהוא טובל, "until he dip himself" ^l. Add to this, that there was the molten sea also for the priests to wash in, 2Ch 4:6 which was done by immersion; on which one of the Jewish commentators ^m has these words:

"the sea was לטבילת, "for the dipping" of the priests; for in the midst of it, they dipped themselves from their uncleanness; but in the Jerusalem Talmud ⁿ there is an objection, is it not a vessel? as if it was said, how can they "dip" in it, for is it not a vessel? and there is no "dipping" in vessels: R. Joshua ben Levi replied, a pipe of water was laid to it from the fountain of Etam, and the feet of the oxen, (which were under the molten sea,) were open at the pomegranates; so that it was as if it was from under the earth, and the waters came to it, and entered, and ascended, by the way of the feet of the oxen, which were open beneath them, and bored.

The reason of the objection is, because bathing, or dipping for purification, was not made in vessels, but in gatherings, or pools of water upon the ground; and which objection is removed, by observing, that a pipe was laid from the fountain of Etam, which supplied it with spring, or running water; so that the molten sea, and the lavers, were looked upon all one as pools of water, or springs of water, and as fit for immersion. This sea was ten cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high, and held two thousand baths, 1Ki 7:23. Yea, three thousand, as in 2Ch 6:5 and every laver held forty baths, 1Ki 7:38 and every bath held four gallons and a half, and between seven and eight gallons of wine measure. And it may be observed, that there were also in Jerusalem the pool of Bethesda, into which persons went down at certain times, Joh 5:1 and the pool of Siloam, where persons bathed, and dipped themselves, on certain occasions; See Gill on Joh 9:7. So that there were conveniences enough for baptism by immersion in this place: and the same day there were added; unto them, or to the church, as in Act 2:47 the whole company of the hundred and twenty disciples; the Arabic version supplies, "among the believers": the number of those, that were added to them, were about three thousand souls; or persons, men, and women; and their number is no objection to their being baptized by immersion. As for convenient places to baptize in, there were enough, as we have seen already; and there were administrators sufficient for this work: had there been no more than the twelve apostles, it was but two hundred and fifty men apiece; and there were twelve separate places in the temple, where they might be baptizing at the same time; there were the ten lavers, the molten sea, and the dipping room, so that the work was not so very heavy nor difficult; but besides, there were seventy disciples, who, as they were preachers of the word, were administrators of this ordinance; and supposing them all employed, as they might be, at the same time, either in the temple, or at the pools in Jerusalem, or at the baths, and cisterns, in private houses; they would not have more than six or seven and thirty persons apiece to baptize; and there was time enough in the day for it; it was but the third hour, or nine o'clock in the morning, when Peter began his sermon; and allowing an hour for that, there were eight hours more in the day, according to the Jewish reckoning of twelve hours in a day; so that the business might be done without any hurry, or great fatigue; and indeed, the objection, as to time, would equally lie against sprinkling, or pouring, as dipping; at least the difference is very inconsiderable; for the same form of words must be pronounced in administering the ordinance by the one, as by the other; and a person being ready, is very near as soon dipped into water, as water can be taken, and sprinkled, or poured on the face. Besides, after all, though these persons were added to the church the same day, it does not necessarily follow from the text, that they were all baptized in one day; the words do not oblige us to such a sense: I own, I am of opinion, that they were all baptized in one day; and that on the same day they were baptized, they were joined to the church; and that day was the day of Pentecost, the day on which the law was given on Mount Sinai, and on which now the Gospel was published to men of all nations under the heavens; the day on which the firstfruits were offered to the Lord, and on which now the firstfruits of the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ were brought in to him. Let the order be observed, they were first baptized, and then added to the church,

Gill: Act 2:42

And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine,.... And which is the same with the doctrine of Christ, of which he is the author, preacher, and subject; the substance of which is peace, pardon, righteousness, and salvation by him: this the apostles received from Christ, and constantly taught in their ministry; for which reason, it is called theirs; and this these young converts had embraced gladly; and were not only believers of it, but persevering believers; they were constant hearers of it; they continually attended on the ministry of the apostles, and held fast the form of sound words they had received from them; and stood fast in the faith of the Gospel, notwithstanding all the reproach cast upon it, and the afflictions they endured for it:

and fellowship; with the apostles and other saints, in spiritual conversation with them, in private, and in communion with them at the Lord's table in public: and so the Vulgate Latin reads this clause, in connection with the next, thus, "in the communication of breaking of bread"; to which agrees the Syriac version, and "they communicated in prayer, and in breaking of the eucharist"; though it seems better to understand this of a distinct branch of fellowship, or communication, and may rather intend liberality and beneficence, in which sense it is used, Rom 15:26 and so expresses their constant contributions towards the support of the apostles, as ministers of the word and of the poor members of the church; a duty which, in both its branches, is incumbent on those who have it in their power to perform, and which these first Christians were remarkable for:

and in breaking of bread; or "of the eucharist": as the Syriac version renders it, which was an usual name with the ancients for the Lord's supper; and which seems to be intended here, and not eating common bread, or a common meal; seeing it is here mentioned with religious exercises: and though the Jews used to begin their meals with breaking of bread, yet the whole repast, or meal, is never by them called by that name; and for what reason these saints should be commended for keeping their common meals, cannot be said, unless to show their sociableness, agreement, and brotherly love in eating together; and which is not hinted at here, but in Act 2:46 where it is mentioned as something distinct from this: it seems rather therefore to design, that they were constant at the Lord's table, kept their places there, and duly attended whenever the ordinance was administered:

and in prayers: not only in their closets, and in their families, but in the church; in the public prayers of the church, they observed all opportunities of this kind, and gladly embraced them.

Gill: Act 2:43

Upon every inhabitant of Jerusalem, at least upon a great many of them; and upon all, or the greater part of them that saw, and heard these things; that heard the apostles speak with divers tongues, and Peter preach in the awful manner he did, and saw so many thousands at once embrace the Gospel of Christ, and profess his name, when it now, by reason of his crucifixion but a few weeks ago, lay under the greatest reproach and scandal; and such a number baptized in water; and also because of the miracles done by the apostles, after mentioned. The Ethiopic version is very odd, "and all animals feared the apostles": as if the very brute creatures stood in awe of them:

and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles: the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions add, "in Jerusalem"; such as casting out devils, healing the sick, causing the lame to walk, &c. which were promised by Christ should be done by them; and which were necessary for the confirmation of the Gospel, and of the apostles' mission to preach it. The Vulgate Latin version adds another clause, much like the first part of the text, "and great fear was upon all": and the Alexandrian copy, and some others, read, "in Jerusalem, there was great fear upon all."

Gill: Act 2:44

And all that believed were together,.... Not in one place, for no one house could hold them all, their number was now so large; but they "agreed together", as the Arabic version renders it: all these believers were of one mind and judgment, as to doctrines, they agreed in their sentiments and principles of religion; and they were of one heart and soul, were cordially affected to each other, and mutually were assisting to one another in temporals, as well as in spirituals:

and had all things common: that is, their worldly goods, their possessions and estates; no man called anything peculiarly his own; and whatever he had, his brother was welcome to, and might as freely take, and use it, as if it was his own.

Gill: Act 2:45

And sold their possessions and goods..... Their houses and lands, their fields and vineyards, their goods, moveable or immoveable:

and parted them to all men; that were of their society, not to others:

as every man had need: the rich sold their estates, and divided them among the poor, or gave them such a portion thereof as their present exigencies required. This was done by Jews, and by Jews only; who, when they embraced the Gospel of Christ, were informed that the destruction of their city, and nation, was at hand; and therefore they sold their estates before hand, and put them to this use; which was necessary to be done, both for the support of the Gospel in Judea, and for the carrying and spreading of it among the Gentiles: but is not to be drawn into a precedent, or an example in after times; nor is ever any such thing proposed to the Christian churches, or exhorted to by any of the apostles.

Gill: Act 2:46

And they continued daily with one accord in the temple,.... Every day they went up to the temple, at the time of prayer, or whenever any religious service was to be performed; this was their constant practice, and in this they agreed:

and breaking bread from house to house; either administering the Lord's supper in private houses, as the Jews kept their passover, sometimes administering it at one house, and sometimes at another; or because their number was so large, that one house could not hold them, they divided themselves into lesser bodies; and some met, and had the ordinance administered to them in one house, and some in another: or this may be understood of their common meals, which they ate together at one another's houses in great love and friendship; for

they did eat their meat with gladness; with great thankfulness to the God of their mercies for their daily food, acknowledging that all came from him, and that they were undeserving of it, and with much cheerfulness and affability one among another, without murmuring and repining at their lot, or envying each other, or grudging what each other partook of:

and singleness of heart; without deceit and hypocrisy; either in their thanksgivings to God, or in their welcome and entertainment of each other; and with great sincerity, openness, and frankness before God, and one another. The Syriac version joins this clause with the beginning of the next verse, "with singleness of heart, praising God".

Gill: Act 2:47

Praising God,.... Not only for their temporal mercies and enjoyments of life, which they partook of in so delightful and comfortable a manner; but for their spiritual mercies, that the Lord had been pleased to call them by his grace, and reveal Christ to them, and pardon them who had been such vile sinners, give them a name, and a place in his house, and favour them with the ordinances of it, and such agreeable and delightful company as the saints were, they had fellowship with:

having favour with all the people; they not only behaved with such true and sincere love towards one another in their church state, but with so much wisdom, courteousness, and affability towards them that were without, and walked so becoming the profession they made, that they gained the good will of the generality of the people:

and the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved: partly by the conversation of these young converts, and chiefly by the ministry of the word, many souls were won and gained to Christ, were wrought upon, and converted, whose hearts the Lord inclined to give up themselves to the church, and walk with them in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord; and these were such whom God had chosen to salvation by Jesus Christ, and whom he had redeemed by his precious blood, and who were now regenerated and sanctified by the Spirit of God, and so should certainly be saved; which is not always the case of persons added to churches, many of whom have not the root of the matter in them, and so fall away; but is of those who are added by the Lord, for there is a difference between being added by the Lord, and being added by men.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Act 2:27

¹ tn Or “will not abandon my soul to Hades.” Often “Hades” is the equivalent of the Hebrew term Sheol, the place of the dead.

² tn Grk “to see,” but the literal translation of the phrase “to see decay” could be misunderstood to mean simply “to look at decay,” while here “see decay” is really figurative for “experience decay.”

NET Notes: Act 2:28

¹ sn A quotation from Ps 16:8-11.

NET Notes: Act 2:29

¹ tn Since this represents a continuation of the address beginning in v.14 and continued in v. 22, “brothers” has been used here rather than a generic expression like “brothers and sisters.”

² sn Peter’s certainty is based on well-known facts.

³ tn Or “about our noted ancestor,” “about the patriarch.”

NET Notes: Act 2:30

¹ tn The participles ὑπάρχων (Juparcwn) and εἰδώς (eidw") are translated as causal adverbial participles.

² tn Grk “one from the fruit of his loins.” “Loins” is the traditional translation of ὀσφῦς (osfu"), referring to the male genital organs. A literal rendering like “one who came from his genital organs” would be regarded as too specific and perhaps even vulgar by many contemporary readers. Most modern translations thus render the phrase “one of his descendants.”

³ sn An allusion to Ps 132:11 and 2 Sam 7:12-13, the promise in the Davidic covenant.

NET Notes: Act 2:31

¹ tn Grk “David foreseeing spoke.” The participle προϊδών (proidwn) is taken as indicating means. It could also be translated as a participle of attendant circumstance: “David foresaw [this] and spoke.” The word “this” is supplied in either case as an understood direct object (direct objects in Greek were often omitted, but must be supplied for the modern English reader).

² tn Or “the Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

sn The term χριστός (cristos) was originally an adjective (“anointed”), developing in LXX into a substantive (“an anointed one”), then developing still further into a technical generic term (“the anointed one”). In the intertestamental period it developed further into a technical term referring to the hoped-for anointed one, that is, a specific individual. In the NT the development starts there (technical-specific), is so used in the gospels, and then develops in Paul’s letters to mean virtually Jesus’ last name.

³ tn Or “abandoned in the world of the dead.” The translation “world of the dead” for Hades is suggested by L&N 1.19. The phrase is an allusion to Ps 16:10.

⁴ tn Grk “flesh.” See vv. 26b-27. The reference to “body” in this verse picks up the reference to “body” in v. 26. The Greek term σάρξ (sarx) in both verses literally means “flesh”; however, the translation “body” stresses the lack of decay of his physical body. The point of the verse is not merely the lack of decay of his flesh alone, but the resurrection of his entire person, as indicated by the previous parallel line “he was not abandoned to Hades.”

⁵ tn Grk “see,” but the literal translation of the phrase “see decay” could be misunderstood to mean simply “look at decay,” while here “see decay” is really figurative for “experience decay.”

⁶ sn An allusion to Ps 16:10.

NET Notes: Act 2:32

¹ tn Or “of him”; Grk “of which [or whom] we are all witnesses” (Acts 1:8).

NET Notes: Act 2:33

¹ tn The aorist participle ὑψωθείς (Juywqei") could be taken temporally: “So then, after he was exalted…” In the translation the more neutral “exalted” (a shorter form of “having been exalted”) was used to preserve the ambiguity of the original Greek.

² sn The expression the right hand of God represents supreme power and authority. Its use here sets up the quotation of Ps 110:1 in v. 34.

³ tn The aorist participle λαβών (labwn) could be taken temporally: “So then, after he was exalted…and received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit.” In the translation the more neutral “having received” was used to preserve the ambiguity of the original Greek.

⁴ tn Here the genitive τοῦ πνεύματος (tou pneumato") is a genitive of apposition; the promise consists of the Holy Spirit.

⁵ sn The use of the verb poured out looks back to 2:17-18, where the same verb occurs twice.

NET Notes: Act 2:34

¹ sn Sit at my right hand. The word “sit” alludes back to the promise of “seating one on his throne” in v. 30.

NET Notes: Act 2:35

¹ sn The metaphor make your enemies a footstool portrays the complete subjugation of the enemies.

² sn A quotation from Ps 110:1, one of the most often-cited OT passages in the NT, pointing to the exaltation of Jesus.

NET Notes: Act 2:36

¹ tn Or “know for certain.” This term is in an emphatic position in the clause.

² tn Grk “has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” The clause has been simplified in the translation by replacing the pronoun “him” with the explanatory clause “this Jesus whom you crucified” which comes at the end of the sentence.

³ sn Lord. This looks back to the quotation of Ps 110:1 and the mention of “calling on the Lord” in 2:21. Peter’s point is that the Lord on whom one calls for salvation is Jesus, because he is the one mediating God’s blessing of the Spirit as a sign of the presence of salvation and the last days.

⁴ tn Or “and Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

sn See the note on Christ in 2:31.

NET Notes: Act 2:37

¹ tn The word “this” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

² tn Grk “they were pierced to the heart” (an idiom for acute emotional distress).

NET Notes: Act 2:38

¹ tn The verb is a third person imperative, but the common translation “let each of you be baptized” obscures the imperative force in English, since it sounds more like a permissive (“each of you may be baptized”) to the average English reader.

² tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

sn In the name of Jesus Christ. Baptism in Messiah Jesus’ name shows how much authority he possesses.

³ tn There is debate over the meaning of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν (eis afesin twn Jamartiwn Jumwn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a causal sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain here. ExSyn 369-71 discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: (1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and εἰς has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works – an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); (2) The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts – especially in this text (cf. 2:41); (3) The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling εἰς, but its subtlety and awkwardness count against it; (4) Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BDAG 290 s.v. εἰς 4.f.

⁴ tn Here the genitive τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος (tou Jagiou pneumato") is a genitive of apposition; the gift consists of the Holy Spirit.

NET Notes: Act 2:39

¹ sn The promise refers to the promise of the Holy Spirit that Jesus received from the Father in 2:33 and which he now pours out on others. The promise consists of the Holy Spirit (see note in 2:33). Jesus is the active mediator of God’s blessing.

NET Notes: Act 2:40

¹ tn Or “warned.”

² tn Or “crooked” (in a moral or ethical sense). See Luke 3:5.

NET Notes: Act 2:41

¹ tn Or “who acknowledged the truth of.”

² tn Grk “word.”

³ tn Grk “souls” (here an idiom for the whole person).

⁴ tn Or “were won over.”

NET Notes: Act 2:42

¹ sn Fellowship refers here to close association involving mutual involvement and relationships.

² tn Grk “prayers.” This word was translated as a collective singular in keeping with English style.

NET Notes: Act 2:43

¹ tn Or “Fear.”

² tn Grk “on every soul” (here “soul” is an idiom for the whole person).

³ tn In this context the miraculous nature of these signs is implied. Cf. BDAG 920 s.v. σημεῖον 2.a.

NET Notes: Act 2:44

¹ tn Grk “had.”

NET Notes: Act 2:45

¹ tn The imperfect verb has been translated as an ingressive (“began…”). Since in context this is a description of the beginning of the community of believers, it is more likely that these statements refer to the start of various activities and practices that the early church continued for some time.

² tn It is possible that the first term for property (κτήματα, kthmata) refers to real estate (as later usage seems to indicate) while the second term (ὑπάρξεις, Juparxeis) refers to possessions in general, but it may also be that the two terms are used together for emphasis, simply indicating that all kinds of possessions were being sold. However, if the first term is more specifically a reference to real estate, it foreshadows the incident with Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11.

³ tn Grk “distributing them” (αὐτά, auta). The referent (the proceeds of the sales) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Act 2:46

¹ tn BDAG 437 s.v. ἡμέρα 2.c has “every day” for this phrase.

² tn Grk “in the temple.” This is actually a reference to the courts surrounding the temple proper, and has been translated accordingly.

³ tn Here κατά (kata) is used as a distributive (BDAG 512 s.v. B.1.d).

⁴ sn The term glad (Grk “gladness”) often refers to joy brought about by God’s saving acts (Luke 1:14, 44; also the related verb in 1:47; 10:21).

⁵ tn Grk “with gladness and humbleness of hearts.” It is best to understand καρδίας (kardias) as an attributed genitive, with the two nouns it modifies actually listing attributes of the genitive noun which is related to them.

NET Notes: Act 2:47

¹ tn Or “the favor.”

² tn BDAG 437 s.v. ἡμέρα 2.c has “every day” for this phrase.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:27

Because thou wilt not ^{( t )} leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

^{( t )} You will not allow me to remain in the grave.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:28

Thou hast ^{( u )} made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

^{( u )} You have opened to me the way of true life.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:30

Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had ^{( x )} sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

^{( x )} Had sworn solemnly.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:32

^{( 7 )} This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

^{( 7 )} Peter witnesses that Jesus Christ is the appointed everlasting King, which he manifestly proves by the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the testimony of David.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:33

Therefore being by the ^{( y )} right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

^{( y )} Might and power of God.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:36

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath ^{( z )} made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

^{( z )} Christ is said to be "made" because he was advanced to that dignity, and therefore it is not spoken with reference to his nature, but with reference to his position and high dignity.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:38

^{( 8 )} Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

^{( 8 )} Repentance and remission of sins in Christ are two principles of the Gospel and therefore of our salvation: and they are obtained by the promises apprehended by faith, and are ratified by us in baptism; and with our salvation comes the power of the Holy Spirit (Ed.).

Geneva Bible: Act 2:39

For the ^{( a )} promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.

^{( a )} The word that is used here shows us that it was a free gift.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:40

^{( 9 )} And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

^{( 9 )} He is truly joined to the Church who separates himself from the wicked.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:41

^{( 10 )} Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

^{( 10 )} A notable example of the power of the Holy Spirit: but such are not baptized until they make confession of their faith. (Ed.)

Geneva Bible: Act 2:42

^{( 11 )} And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and ^{( b )} fellowship, and in ^{( c )} breaking of bread, and in prayers.

^{( 11 )} The marks of the true Church are the doctrine of the apostles, the duties of charity, the pure and simple administration of the ordinances, and the true invocation used by all of the faithful.

^{( b )} Sharing of goods, and all other duties of charity, as is shown afterwards.

^{( c )} The Jews used thin loaves, and therefore they broke them rather than cut them: so by breaking of bread they meant living together, and the banquets which they used to keep. And when they kept their love feasts, they used to celebrate the Lord's supper, which even in those days began to be corrupted, and Paul corrects this in (1Co. 11:17-34).

Geneva Bible: Act 2:43

^{( 12 )} And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.

^{( 12 )} As often as the Lord thinks it to be expedient, he bridles the rage of strangers, so that the Church may be planted and have some refreshing.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:44

^{( 13 )} And all that believed were together, and had all things common;

^{( 13 )} Charity makes all things common with regard to their use, according as necessity requires.

Geneva Bible: Act 2:46

^{( 14 )} And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,

^{( 14 )} The faithful came together at the beginning with tremendous results, not only for the hearing of the word, but also to eat.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Act 2:1-47

1 The apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost, and speaking divers languages, are admired by some, and derided by others;

14 whom Peter disproves;

37 he baptizes a great number that were converted;

41 who afterwards devoutly and charitably converse together; the apostles working many miracles, and God daily increasing his church.

Combined Bible: Act 2:27

notes on verse 25  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:28

notes on verse 25  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:29

Having exhibited, in the quotation from David, "the determined purpose, and foreknowledge of God," in reference to the resurrection of Jesus, the apostle, never overlooking the logical necessities of his argument, next considers the only objection which his hearers would likely to urge against his prophetic proof. In the words quoted, David speaks in the first person, and this might lead some to object, that he was speaking of himself, and not of the Messiah. If, however, it be proved that he did not speak of himself, they would readily admit that he spoke in the name of the Christ. Peter proves this, in these words: (29) " Brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. (30) Being a prophet, then, and knowing that God had sworn to him, that from the fruit of his loins he would raise up the Christ, according to the flesh, to sit on his throne; (31) foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that his soul was not left in hades, neither did his flesh see corruption. " David's own flesh having seen corruption, as they themselves admitted, and his soul being still in hades, there was no alternative but to admit that he spoke of the Messiah. This brief argument not only refuted the supposed objection, but opened the minds of his hearers, to an entirely new conception of the prophetic throne of David, and of the Messiah, who was to occupy it; showing, that instead of being the ruler of an earthly kingdom, however, glorious, he was to sit upon the throne of the whole universe.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:30

notes on verse 29  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:31

notes on verse 29  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:32

33. Thus far in his argument, the speaker has proved that the Messiah must rise from the dead to ascend his throne; but he has yet to prove that Jesus was thus raised, and was, therefore, the Messiah of whom David had spoken. He proves the resurrection by the testimony of himself and the eleven other witnesses standing with him: (32) " This Jesus has God raised up, of which we are all witnesses. " Here the twelve unimpeached witnesses testifying to a sensible fact, and presenting their testimony with all the authority belonging to miraculously attested messengers from God. This was sufficient, as to the resurrection. But it must also be proved that after he arose he ascended to heaven and sat down upon his throne. It would be unavailing, for this purpose, to urge the fact that the twelve had seen him ascend; for their eyes had followed him no further than the cloud which received him out of sight. But he presents, in proof, this immersion in the Holy Spirit, which the multitude were witnessing, and which could be effected by no one beneath the throne of God. (33) " Therefore, being to the right hand of God exalted, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has shed forth this which you now see and hear. " What they then saw and heard was both the proof that he who sent it down had ascended the throne of heaven, and the assurance that Peter spoke by divine authority in declaring this fact.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:33

notes on verse 32  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:34

35. One more point established, not so much in proof of the exaltation of Christ, as to show that it also was a subject of prophesy, and this inimitable argument will be complete. (34) " For David has not ascended into the heavens, but he himself says, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, (35) until I make thy foes thy footstool. " The Pharisees themselves admitted that in this passage David referred to the Messiah, and had been much puzzled by the admission in a memorable conversation with Jesus; but Peter, unwilling to take any thing as granted, which might afterward be made a ground of objection, carefully guards the application, as he had done that of the previous quotation by David, by the remark that David himself had not ascended to heaven; hence, he could not, in these words, be speaking of himself. This admitted, it must be granted that he spoke of the Messiah, for certainly David would call no other his Lord.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:35

notes on verse 34  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:36

The progressive advances of his argument being now complete, those of them which needed proof being sustained by conclusive evidence, and the remainder consisting in facts well known to his audience, he announces his final conclusion in these bold and confident terms: (36) " Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus whom you have crucified both Lord and Christ. "   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:37

It has already been observed, that up to the moment in which Peter arose to address the audience, although the immersion in the Holy Spirit had occurred, and its effects had been fully witnessed by the people, no change had taken place in their minds in reference to Jesus Christ, neither did they experience any emotion, except confusion and amazement at a phenomenon which they could not comprehend. This fact proves, conclusively, that there was no power in the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit, which they witnesses, in itself alone, to produce in them the desired change. All the power which belonged to this event must have come short of the desired effect, but for a medium distinct from itself, through which it reached the minds and hearts of the people. The medium was the words of Peter. He spoke; and when he had announced the conclusion of his argument, Luke says: (37) " Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the other apostles, Brethren, what shall we do? " In this exclamation there is a manifest confession that they believe what Peter has preached to them; and Luke's declaration that they were pierced to the heart shows that they felt intensely the power of the facts which they now believed. Since Peter began to speak, therefore, a change has taken place both in their convictions and their feelings. They are convinced that Jesus is the Christ, and they are pierced to the heart with anguish at the thought of having murdered him. In the mean time, not a word is said of any influence at work upon them, except that of the words spoken by Peter; hence we conclude that the change in their minds and hearts has been effected through those words. This conclusion was also drawn by Luke himself; for in saying, "when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and cried out," he evidently attributes their emotion and their outcry to what they heard, as the cause of both.  

If Luke had regarded the change effected as one which could be produced only by the direct agency of the Holy Spirit, he could not have expressed himself in these words, for his language not only entirely ignores such an influence, but attributes the effect to a different instrumentality. We understand him, therefore, to teach that the whole change thus far effected in these men was produced through the word of truth which they heard from Peter.  

Let it be observed, however, that what they had heard concerning Christ, they had heard not as the words of the mere man Peter; for, previous to introducing the name of Jesus, he had clearly demonstrated the inspiration of himself and the other apostles. This being established beyond the possibility of rational doubt, from the moment that he began to speak of Jesus they were listening to him as an inspired man. But the Jews had long since learned to ascribe to the words of inspired men all the authority of the Spirit who spoke through them; hence this audience realized that all the power to convince and to move, that the authority of God himself could impart to words, belonged to the words of Peter. If they could believe God, they must believe the oracles of God which find utterance through Peter's lips. They do believe, and they believe because the words they hear are recognized as the words of God. Faith, then, comes by hearing the word of God; and he who hears the admitted word of God, must believe, or deny that God speaks the truth. This is true, whether the word is heard from the lips of the inspired men who originally gave it utterance, or is received through other authentic channels. The power by which the word of God produces faith is all derived from the fact that it is the word of God.   

No words, whether of men or of God, can effect moral changes in the feelings of the hearer, unless they are believed; nor can they when believed, unless they announce truths or facts calculated to produce such change. In the present instance, the facts announced placed the hearers in the awful attitude of the murderers of the Son of God, who was now not only alive again, but seated on the throne of God, with all power in his hands, both on earth and in heaven. The belief of these facts necessarily filled them with the most intense realization of guilt, and the most fearful anticipation of punishment. The former of these emotions is expressed by the words of Luke, "They were pierced to the heart ;" the latter, in their own words, "Brethren, what shall we do? " They had just heard Peter, in the language of Joel, speak of a possible salvation; and the question, What shall we do? unquestionably means, What shall we do to be saved?   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:38

This is the first time, under the reign of Jesus Christ, that this most important of all questions was ever propounded; and the first time, of course, that it was every answered. Whatever may have been the true answer under any previous dispensation, or on any previous day in the world's history, the answer given by Peter on this day of Pentecost, in which the reign of Christ on earth began, is the true and infallible answer for all the subjects of his authority in all subsequent time. It deserves our most profound attention; for it announces the conditions of pardon for all men who may be found in the same state of mind with these inquiries. It is expressed as follows: (38) " Then Peter said to them, Repent and be immersed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "  

That the offer of pardon, made to the world through Jesus Christ, is conditional, is denied only by the fatalist. We will not argue this point, expect as it is involved in the inquiry as to what the conditions of pardon are. When we ascertain the prescribed conditions of pardon, both questions will be settled in settling one.  

Pardon is the chief want of the human soul, in its most favorable earthly circumstances. The rebel against God's government, though he lay down his arms and becomes a loyal subject, can have no hope of happiness without pardon for the past; while the pardoned penitent, humbly struggling in the service of God, knows himself still guilty of shortcomings, by which he must fail of the final reward, unless pardoned again and again. The question as to what are the conditions of pardon, therefore, necessarily divides itself into two; one having reference to the hitherto-unpardoned sinner, the other to the saint who may have fallen into sin. It is the former class who propounded the question to Peter, and it is to them alone that the answer under consideration was given. We will confine ourselves, in our present remarks, to this branch of the subject, and discuss it only in the light of the passage before us.  

If we regard the question of the multitude, What shall we do? as simply a question of duty under their peculiar circumstances, without special reference to final results, we learn from the answer that there were two things for them to do- Repent, and be immersed. If Peter had stopped with these two words, his answer would have been satisfactory, in this view of the subject, and it would have been the conclusion of the world, that the duty of a sinner, "pierced to the heart" by a sense of guilt, is to repent and be immersed.   

But if we regard their question as having definite reference to the salvation of which Peter had already spoken, ( verse 21 Ac 2:21> ,) and their meaning, What shall we do to be saved? then the answer is equally definite: it teaches that what a sinner thus affected is to do to be saved, is to repent and be immersed.   

From these two observations, the reader perceives, that so far as the conditions of salvation from past sins are concerned, the duty of the sinner is most definitely taught by the first two words of the answer, taken in connection with their question, without entering upon the controversy concerning the remainder of the answer. If it had been Peter's design merely to give an answer in concise terms, without explanation, no doubt he would have confined it to these two words, for they contain the only commands which he gives.  

But he saw fit to accompany the two commands with suitable explanations. He qualifies the command to be immersed by the clause, "in the name of Jesus Christ," to show that it is under his authority that they were to be immersed, and not merely under that of the Father, whose authority alone was recognized in John's immersion. That we are right in referring to this limiting clause, "in the name of Jesus Christ," to the command to be immersed, and not to the command repent, is evident from the fact that it would be incongruous to say, " Repent in the name of Jesus Christ."  

Peter further explains the two commands, by stating their specific design; by which term we mean the specific blessing which was to be expected as the consequence of obedience. It is " for the remission of sins. " To convince an unbiased mind that this clause depends upon both the preceding commands, and express their design, it would only be necessary to repeat the words, "Repent and be immersed in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." But, inasmuch as it has suited the purpose of some controversialists to dispute this proposition, we here give the opinions of two recent representative commentators, who can not be suspected of undue bias in its favor.  

Dr. Alexander (Presbyterian) says, "The whole phrase, to (or toward) remission of sins, describes this as the end to which the multitude had reference, and which, therefore, must be contemplated in the answer." Again: "The beneficial end to which all this led was the remission of sins. "  

Dr. Hackett (Baptist) expresses himself still more satisfactorily: " eis aphesin hamartion, in order to the forgiveness of sins, ( Matt 26:28 Luke 3:3 Mt 26:28> ,) we connect, naturally, with the both the preceding verbs. This clause states the motive or object which should induce them to repent and be baptized. It enforces the entire exhortation, not one part of it to the exclusion of the other."  

The connection contended for can not be made more apparent by argument; it needs only that attention be called to it, in order to be perceived by every unbiased mind. It is possible that some doubt might arise in reference to the connection of the clause with the term repent, but one would imagine that its connection with the command be immersed could not be doubted, but for the fact that it has been disputed. Indeed, some controversialists have felt so great necessity for denying the last-named connection, as to assume that the clause, "for the remission of sins" depends largely upon the term repent, and that the connection of thought is this: "Repent for the remission of sins, and be immersed in the name of Jesus Christ." It is a sufficient refutation of this assumption to remark, that, if Peter had intended to say this, he would most certainly have done so; but he has said something entirely different; and this shows that he meant something entirely different. If men are permitted, after this style, to entirely reconstruct the sentences of inspired apostles, then there is no statement in the Word of God which may not be perverted. We dismiss this baseless assumption with the remark, that it has not been dignified by the indorsement of any writer of respectable attainments, known to the author, and it would not be noticed here, but for the frequency of its appearance in the pulpit, in the columns of denominational newspapers, and on the pages of partisan tracts.  

The dependence of the clause, "for the remission of sins," upon both the verbs repent and be immersed, being established, it would seem undeniable that remission of sins is the blessing in order to the enjoyment of which they were commanded to repent and be immersed. This is universally admitted so far as the term repent is concerned, but by many denied in reference to the command be immersed; hence the proposition that immersion is for the remission of sins is rejected by the Protestant sects in general. Assuming that remission of sins precedes immersion, and that, so far as adults are concerned, the only proper subjects for this ordinance are those whose sins are already pardoned, it is urged that for in this clause means " on account of " or " because of. " Hence, Peter is understood to command, "Repent and be immersed on account of remission of sins already enjoyed. " But this interpretation is subject to two insuperable objections. 1st. To command men to repent and be immersed because their sins were already remitted, is to require them not only to be immersed on this account, but to repent because they were already pardoned. There is no possibility of extricating the interpretation from this absurdity. 2d. It contradicts an obvious fact of the case. It makes Peter command the inquirers to be immersed because their sins were already remitted, whereas it is an indisputable fact that their sins were not yet remitted. On the contrary, they were still pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt, and by the question they propounded were seeking how they might obtain the very pardon which this interpretation assumes that they already enjoyed. Certainly no sane man would assume a position involving such absurdity, and so contradictory to an obvious fact, were he not driven to it by the inexorable demands of a theory which could not be otherwise sustained.  

We observe, further, in reference to this interpretation, that even if we admit the propriety of supplanting the preposition for by the phrase on account of, the substitute will not answer the purpose for which it is employed. The meaning of this phrase varies, according as its object is past or future. " On account of " some past event may mean because it has taken place; but on account of an event yet in the future, would, in the same connection, mean in order that it might take place. The same is true of the equivalent phrase, "because of." If, then, the parties addressed by Peter were already pardoned, " on account of the remission of sins" would mean, because their sins had been remitted. But as this is an indisputable fact that the parties addressed were yet unpardoned, what they are commanded to do on account of remission of sins must mean, in order that their sins may be remitted. Such a rendering, therefore, would not even render the obvious meaning of the passage less perspicuous than it already is.  

It will be found that any other substitute for the preposition for, designed to force upon the passage a meaning different from that which it obviously bears, will as signally fail to suit the purpose of its author. If, with Dr. Alexander, we render, Repent and be immersed " to (or toward ) remission of sins," we still have remission both beyond repentance and immersion, and depending upon them as preparatory conditions. Indeed, this rendering would leave it uncertain whether repentance and immersion would bring them to remission of sins, or only toward it, leaving an indefinite space yet to pass before obtaining it.  

If, with others still-for every effort that ingenuity could suggest has been made to find another meaning for this passage-we render it, Repent and be immersed unto or into remission of sins, the attempt is fruitless; for remission of sins is still the blessing unto which or into which repentance and immersion are to lead the inquirers.  

Sometimes the advocates of these various renderings, when disheartened by the failure of their attempts at argument and criticism, resort to raillery, and assert that the whole doctrine of immersion for the remission of sins depends upon the one little word for in the command, "be immersed for the remission of sins." If this were true, it would be no humiliation; for a doctrine based upon a word of God, however small, has an eternal and immutable foundation. But it is not true. On the contrary, you may draw a pencil-mark over the whole clause, "for the remission of sins," erasing it, with all the remainder of Peter's answer, and still the meaning will remain unchanged. The connection would then read thus: "Brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said to them, Repent, and be immersed every one of you in the name of the Lord Jesus." Remembering now that these parties were pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt, and that their question means, What shall we do to be saved from out sins? the answer must be understood as the answer to that question. But the answer is, Repent and be immersed; therefore, to repent and to be immersed are the two things which they must do in order to be saved from their sins.   

The reader now perceives, that, in this first announcement to sinners of the terms of pardon, so guardedly has Peter expressed himself, and so skillfully has Luke interwoven with his words the historic facts, that whatever rendering men have forced upon the leading term, the meaning of the whole remains unchanged; and even when you strike this term and its dependent words out of the text, that same meaning still stares you in the face. The fact is suggestive of more than human wisdom. It reminds us that Peter spoke, and Luke wrote, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. That infinite wisdom which was dictating a record for all time to come is displayed here, providing for future controversies which no human being could anticipate. Like the sun in the heavens, which may be temporarily obscured by clouds, but will still break forth again, and shine upon all but those who hide from his beams, the light of truth which God has suspended in this passage may be dimmed for a moment by the mists of partisan criticism, but to those who are willing to see it, it will still send out its beams, and guide the trembling sinner unerringly to pardon and peace.  

If there were any real ground for doubt as to the proper translation and real meaning of the words eis aphesin hamartion, for the remission of sins, when connected with the term immersion, a candid inquirer would resort to its usage when disconnected from this term, and seek thus to determine its exact import. It happens to occur only once in connection suitable to this purpose, but no number of occurrences could more definitely fix its meaning. When instituting the supper, Jesus says, "This is my blood of the new covenant, shed for many for the remission of sins, " eis aphesin hamartion. It is impossible to doubt that the clause here means in order to the remission of sins. In this case it expresses the object for which something is to be done; in the passage we are discussing, it expresses the object for which something is commanded to be done: the grammatical and logical construction is the same in both cases, and, therefore, the meaning is the same. Men are to repent and be immersed in order to the attainment of the same blessing for which the blood of Jesus was shed. The propitiation through his blood was in order to the offer of pardon, while repentance and immersion are enjoined by Peter upon his hearers, in order to the attainment of pardon.  

The careful reader will have observed that in stating the conditions of remission of sins to the multitude, Peter says nothing about the necessity of faith. This omission is not sufficiently accounted for by the fact that faith is implied in the command to repent and be immersed; for the parties now addressed were listening to the terms for the first time, and might fail to perceive this implication. But the fact is, that they did already believe, and it was a result of their faith, that they were pierced to the heart, and made to cry out, What shall we do? This Peter perceived, and therefore it would have been but little less than mockery to command them to believe. It will be observed, throughout the course of apostolic preaching, that they never commanded men to do what they had already done, but took them as they found them, and enjoined upon them only that which they yet lacked of complete obedience. In the case before us, Peter was not laying down a complete formula for the conditions of pardon; but was simply informing the parties before him what they must do in order to the remission of their sins. Being believers already, they must add to their faith repentance and immersion.  

Before dismissing this topic, we must remark that the doctrine of immersion for the remission of sins does not assume that immersion is the only condition of remission, but simply that, it is one among three conditions, and the last of the three. Administered previous to faith and repentance, as in the case of infants, it is not only absolutely worthless, but intensely sinful.  

The exact meaning of the term repent will be considered below, under iii. 19.  

After commanding the inquirers to repent and be immersed for the remission of sins, Peter adds the promise, "and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." The gift of the Holy Spirit should not be confounded with the Holy Spirit's gifts, nor with the fruits of the Spirit. The fruits of the Holy Spirit are religious traits of character, and they result from the gift of the Holy Spirit. The latter expression means, the Holy Spirit as a gift. It is analogous to the expression, "promise of the Holy Spirit" in verse 33 Ac 2:33> , above, where Peter says, "having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has shed forth this which you now see and hear." The gifts of the Holy Spirit were various miraculous powers, intellectual and physical. These were conferred only upon a few individuals, while the gift of the Spirit is promised to all who repent and are immersed.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:39

Peter does not limit the promise of the Holy Spirit to his present audience; but adds, (39) " For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. " That we are right in referring the word promise, in this sentence, to the promise of the Holy Spirit just made by Peter, is evident from the fact that this is the only promise made in the immediate context.  

Some pedobaptist commentators have affected to find in the words, "The promise is to you and your children, " a show of authority for infant membership in the Church of Christ. But Mr. Barnes, though of that school himself, has the candor to say of this expression, "It does not refer to children as children, and should not be adduced to establish the propriety of infant baptism, or as applicable particularly to infants. It is a promise, indeed, to parents, that the blessings of salvation shall not be confined to parents, but shall be extended also to their posterity." That this is the true conception of the apostle's meaning is demonstrated by the fact that the promise in question is based upon the conditions of repentance and immersion, with which infants could not possibly comply.  

The extension of this promise "to all who are afar off," is not to be limited to all the Jews who were afar off; but it is properly qualified by the additional words, "even as many as the Lord our God shall call." It included, therefore, every individual who should, at any future time, be a subject of the gospel call, and guarantees to us, of the present generation, the gift of the Holy Spirit upon the same terms on which it was offered to Peter's hearers on the day of Pentecost.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:40

The historian had now concluded his report of Peter's discourse, but informs us that he has given only an epitome of it. (40) " And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. " The term testify refers to the argumentative portion of his discourse; and the term exhort to the horatory portion. The latter naturally and logically followed his statement of the conditions of pardon, and the substance of it is compressed by Luke into the words, " Save yourselves from this untoward generation." The command to save themselves must sound quite strange in the ears of such modern theorists as affirm that men have no ability to do, or say, or think any thing tending to their own salvation. But this only shows how far they have departed from apostolic speech and thought. Peter had proposed conditions of pardon which they could comply with, and now their salvation depended upon their compliance with these conditions. When they complied with them, they saved themselves. To be saved from that untoward generation was not, as the conceit of Universalists would have it, to escape the siege of Jerusalem; for the great mass of them escaped that, by dying a natural death before it took place. It was to escape the fate which the mass of that generation were destined to meet in eternity, on account of their sins. We will more fully discuss the exact import of their term saved in this and similar connections under verse 47 , below.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:41

The multitude, who had been so pierced to the heart by Peter's discourse, as to cry out, "Brethren, what shall we do?" were happily surprised to find the terms of pardon so easy. (41) " Then they gladly received his word, and were immersed; and the same day there were added about three thousand souls. " The pronoun they identifies the parties immersed with those who had cried out, What shall we do? It shows that they promptly complied with the command which Peter had given them. The word which they gladly received can not be the main part of Peter's speech, for this had pierced them to the heart; but it is the word of his answer, which gave their feelings great relief by opening to them so easy a method of escape from the doom which they dreaded, and which they so richly deserved.  

Times without number the objection has been urged, and as often refuted, that three thousand men could not have been immersed in so short a time, and with the inadequate supply of water afforded in Jerusalem. As to the quantity of available water, Dr. J. T. Barclay, in his work entitled "The City of the Great King," written during a residence of three years and a half in Jerusalem, as a missionary, shows that Jerusalem was anciently better supplied with water than any other city known to history not permeated by living streams. Even to the present day, though most of the public reservoirs are now dry, such as the supposed pool of Bethesda, 365 feet long by 131 in breadth, and the lower pool of Gihon, 600 long by 260 in breadth, there are still in existence bodies of water, such as the pool of Siloam, and the pool of Hezekiah, affording most ample facilities for immersing any number of persons.  

As to the want of time for the immersion of so many, any one who will make the mathematical calculation, without which it is folly to offer the objection, will find that there was the greatest abundance of time. Allowing that Peter's speech commenced at nine o'clock, as he himself states in verse 15 Ac 2:15> , and that the exercises at the temple closed at noon, we have left six hours till sunset. To immerse sixty men in an hour would be very deliberate work for one administrator. But there were twelve administrators, hence, each hour there were not less than seven hundred and twenty persons immersed. At this rate, in less than four and one-fourth hours the whole multitude would be immersed, leaving the sun nearly two hours high when the last candidate emerged from the water. In view of this simple calculation, which a child could make, it is truly astonishing that so many grave critics and preachers should urge this objection. It strikingly illustrates the blinding effects of partisan zeal.  

Now that the three thousand are added to the Church, we may glance back over the history of the day, and learn upon what preparation they were received to the fellowship of the disciples. To accomplish this, we must first consider their state of mind before Peter spoke to them, and then observe the changes through which they passed. Being Jews, then, they were already believers in the true God, and in the inspiration of the Old Testament scriptures. Luke declares, also, that they were "devout men." They were, however, unbelievers in reference to Jesus Christ, and they were guilty of participating in his crucifixion. At the moment that Peter arose to speak, they were full of amazement at witnessing the immersion of the twelve in the Holy Spirit, but their religious character remained unchanged. Peter speaks; and, at the conclusion of his argument, there is an evident change in their convictions. But they believe now nothing additional to what they did at first, except what Peter has proved to them. He has attempted to prove, however, only two propositions: first, That he and the eleven were inspired; second, That Jesus of Nazareth was now both Lord and Christ. The first, moreover, was established only as a means of proving the second. Several other subordinate facts were also proved for the same purpose, so that the whole speech is properly resolved into an attempt to prove the single proposition with which it concludes, that "God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ." This, then, is what the three thousand believed, and this is all that distinguished their faith when immersed, from what it was before they heard the gospel from Peter's lips.  

But another change had occurred within them. Under the influence of their new faith, they were pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt. This is the "godly sorrow" which "works repentance," and it prepared them to promptly obey Peter's command, "Repent, and be immersed." They repented, and were immersed. Their conversion, therefore, consisted in believing that Jesus is the Christ, repenting of their sins, and being immersed. This entitled them to membership in the Church, and so it does every human being who does likewise.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:42

Having been immersed simply upon their faith in Jesus Christ, these young disciples had many subordinate objects of faith to become acquainted with, and many duties yet unknown, in which to be instructed. In giving an account of these matters, Luke is far more brief, adhering strictly to the chief purpose of his narrative, which is to give the process and means of conversion, rather than a history of the edification and instruction of the converted. He closes this section of the history with a brief notice of the order established in the new Church, first describing their order of worship. (42) " And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' teaching, and in fellowship, and in breaking the loaf, and in prayers. "  

The apostles were as yet the only teachers of the Church, and in this work they were executing the second part of their commission, which required them to teach those whom they immersed all things that Jesus had commanded. The same command which made it their duty to teach, made it also the duty of the disciples to learn from them, and to abide by their instruction. This duty the first disciples faithfully complied with, though it has been grievously neglected by their brethren of later ages.  

For the purpose of being taught by the apostles, they must have assembled together, and this was the occasion for manifesting their fellowship, which term expresses their common participation in religious privileges. It has been urged by some writers, that the term koinonia should here be rendered contribution, instead of fellowship, and that it refers to contributions which were regularly made in the public assemblies, for the poor. That the term is used in this limited sense in at least two places in the New Testament, must be admitted, viz.: in Rom 15:26 Ro 15:26> , "It hath pleased them of Macedonia to make a certain contribution for the poor of the saints in Jerusalem;" and in 2 Cor 9:13 2Co 9:13> , where Paul says the saints "glorify God for your liberal contribution to them and to all men." But such is not, by any means, its common usage. It usually occurs in such connections as the following: "You were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ." "The favor of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you." "And truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." "We have fellowship with one another."   

The radical idea in this term is that of participation in common. We have fellowship with God, because we are made partakers of the divine nature, as we escape the corruption which is in the world through lust. We have fellowship with the Son, because of the common sympathies which his life and sufferings have established between himself and us; and with the Spirit, because we partake of the strengthening and enlightening influences of his teachings, and because he dwells in us. We have fellowship with one another, because of the mutual participation in each other's affection and good offices. The term is also used in reference to the Lord's supper. "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the fellowship of the blood of Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not the fellowship of the body of Christ?" We partake in common of the benefits of his broken body and shed blood, which are symbolized in the cup and the loaf.   

From the meaning of the term, as thus exemplified, originates its use in the sense of contribution; for in the act of contributing to the necessities of others, we allow them to participate in the blessings which we enjoy. We are not authorized, however, by the rules of criticism, to give it this limited signification, except where the context clearly requires it. Seeing that Christians enjoy fellowship with so many sources of happiness, the term unrestricted must embrace them all. In the present instance the context imposes no limitation upon its meaning, and it would be quite arbitrary to restrict it to the sense of contribution. The use of the article before koinonia can not be pleaded as a ground for such restriction; for it only indicates the notoriety of that which the term designates. Still, the idea of contributing to the wants of poor brethren is involved in the fellowship of Christians, and by the statement that they continued steadfastly in the fellowship, we understand that they continued in the common participation of religious enjoyments, including contributions for the poor. Whether these contributions were made at every meeting or not, we are not informed; but they were certainly made when circumstances required.  

Together with the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, Luke enumerates "breaking the loaf and prayers," as part of the exercises in which the disciples continued. The frequency with which the loaf was broken is not intimated here. It will be discussed under chapter xx. 7 . This brief statement shows merely that this institution, according to the Savior's command, was observed from the very beginning of the Church.  

The prayers mentioned are those there were offered in public. The number of prayers offered on any occasion, or the order in which the prayers, the instruction, breaking the loaf, and the other acts of fellowship followed each other, is not intimated. Luke's silence in reference to these particulars may have arisen from the fact that there was no invariable order of exercises; or may have been intended to prevent the order in the Jerusalem Church from being regarded as an authoritative precedent. It shows clearly the intention of the Holy Spirit that the assemblies of the saints should be left to the exercise of their own discretion in matters of this kind, and furnishes a most singular rebuke to the hundreds of party leaders who have since attempted to impose authoritative rituals upon the congregations. If the example of the Church in Jerusalem, in this respect, though its exercises were directed by the whole body of the apostles, was not binding upon other Churches, what body of uninspired men shall have the presumption to bind what God has purposely left free?   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:43

Next to this brief notice of the exercises of the Church, we have a glance at the effect of the scenes just described, upon the surrounding community. (43) " And fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. " This fear was not that which partakes of aversion, for we learn below, (47) that many were daily added to the Church; but it was that silent awe which miracles naturally inspired, mingled with respectful deference to a people of such holiness.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:44

45. We are next introduced to a striking instance of the fellowship previously mentioned. (44) " Now all who believed were together, and had all things common, (45) and sold their possessions and goods, and distributed them to all, as any one had need. " This was not a community of goods, by which all were placed on a pecuniary level; for distribution was made only as any one had need. It was only such liberality to the poor as should characterize the congregations of the Lord in every age and country. Poor brethren must not be allowed to suffer for the necessaries of life, though it require us to divide with them the last loaf in our possession. "He who has this world's goods and sees his brother have need, and shuts up his compassion from him, how dwells the love of God in him?" We will, hereafter, see that the Church in Jerusalem was not the only one which engaged in this species of benevolence. This conduct was in marked contrast with the neglect of the poor which was then common among the Jews, even in violation of their own law, and which was universal among the Gentiles. Nothing of this kind had ever been seen on earth before. We will refer to the subject again, under iv. 32, below.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:45

notes on verse 44  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:46

47. The further history of the Church, for a short time, is condensed into this brief statement: (46) " And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, received their food with gladness and singleness of heart, (47) praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added those saved every day to the Church. "  

Whether the disciples continued to offer sacrifices or not-on which question see Com. xxi. 18-26-that they should "continue daily with one accord in the temple," was most natural. The temple had been, to them and their fathers, for many generations, the house of God and the place of prayer. The apostles had been led to its sacred precincts by the Savior himself, and here it was that the Holy Spirit had come upon them. Their most holy associations were connected with it, and it would have been doing great violence to their feelings to require them at once to abandon it. This natural reverence for the place continued till its destruction by Titus; and even to this day, the hill where the temple once stood has a peculiarly sacred place in the hearts of Christians. The "breaking bread," klontes arton, mentioned in this sentence, is not the "breaking of the loaf," e klasis touartou of verse 42 Ac 2:42> ; but refers to common meals of which they partook "from house to house." This is evident from the connection: "breaking bread from house to house, they received their food with gladness and singleness of heart." It was that breaking of bread in which they "received their food," which was not done in partaking of the emblematic loaf. There is no evidence that the emblematic loaf was ever broken in mere social gatherings. It belongs exclusively to the Lord's day.   

By the expression "singleness of heart" is meant the concentration of their affections and desires upon a single subject. This devotion and concentration of thought could but result, as it did, in giving the disciples "favor with all the people," and causing daily additions to the Church.   

Those added to the Church daily were not "such as should be saved," as rendered in the common version, but tous sozomenous, the saved. In what sense they were saved, is a question of some importance. Dr. Hackett says: "The doctrine is that those who embrace the gospel adopt the infallible means of being saved." This is, undoubtedly, true doctrine; but it is not what is taught in the passage; for Luke speaks not of those who daily embraced the means of salvation, but of those who were saved. The view expressed by Alexander, that "men are said to be saved, not only in reference to the final consummation, but to the inception of the saving work," is a nearer approach to the true conception, but still falls short of it. It is not an inception of the saving work, of which Luke speaks, but the salvation referred to is complete; the parties spoken of being called "the saved. " Both these learned commentators, by keeping their minds fixed upon a future state as offering the only fulfillment of the word " saved, " have failed to discover the exact sense in which it is here used by the historian. Primarily, the term save means simply to make safe. In the religious sense, it means to make safe from the consequences of sin. If men had never sinned, they could not be saved, seeing they would be already safe. But having sinned, they are saved when they are made safe from the consequences of their sins. This is done when their sins are forgiven. At the moment a penitent sinner obtains pardon, he is, so far as the past is concerned, completely saved. It is in this sense that the parties in this case added to the Church are called " the saved. " Paul uses the term in the same sense when he says of God, "According to his mercy he saved us, by the laver of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit."   

The fact that the Lord added the saved, or pardoned, to the Church, justifies two conclusions: first, That men are entitled to membership in the Church the moment they are pardoned; second, That men should join the Church, not as a means of obtaining pardon, but because they have already obtained it. The former conclusion shows that it is unscriptural to admit, as some parties do, that certain persons are pardoned, and yet refuse them Church-fellowship. The latter condemns the practice observed by others, of received persons to membership "as a means of grace ;" i. e., as a means of obtaining pardon.  

  

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 2:47

notes on verse 46  

  

Maclaren: Act 2:32-47

Peter's First Sermon

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, He hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, 35. Until I make Thy foes Thy footstool. 36. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. 37. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 40. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.'--Acts 2:32-47.

THIS passage may best be dealt with as divided into three parts: the sharp spear-thrust of Peter's closing words (Acts 2:32-36), the wounded and healed hearers (Acts 2:37-41), and the fair morning dawn of the Church (Acts 2:42-47).

I. Peter's Address Begins With Pointing Out The Fulfilment Of Prophecy In The Gift Of The Spirit (Acts 2:14-21).

It then declares the Resurrection of Jesus as foretold by prophecy, and witnessed to by the whole body of believers (Acts 2:22-32), and it ends by bringing together these two facts, the gift of the Spirit and the Resurrection and Ascension, as effect and cause, and as establishing beyond all doubt that Jesus is the Christ of prophecy, and the Lord on whom Joel had declared that whoever called should be saved. We now begin with the last verse of the second part of the address.

Observe the significant alternation of the names of Christ' and Jesus' in Acts 2:31-32. The former verse establishes that prophecy had foretold the Resurrection of the Messiah, whoever he might be; the latter asserts that this Jesus' has fulfilled the prophetic conditions. That is not a thing to be argued about, but to be attested by competent witnesses. It was presented to the multitude on Pentecost, as it is to us, as a plain matter of fact, on which the whole fabric of Christianity is built, and which itself securely rests on the concordant testimony of those who knew Him alive, saw Him dead, and were familiar with Him risen.

There is a noble ring of certitude in Peter's affirmation, and of confidence that the testimony producible was overwhelming. Unless Jesus had risen, there would neither have been a Pentecost nor a Church to receive the gift. The simple fact which Peter alleged in that first sermon, whereof we all are witnesses,' is still too strong for the deniers of the Resurrection, as their many devices to get over it prove.

But, a listener might ask, what has this witness of yours to do with Joel's prophecy, or with this speaking with tongues? The answer follows in the last part of the sermon. The risen Jesus has ascended up; that is inseparable from the fact of resurrection, and is part of our testimony. He is exalted by,' or, perhaps, at, the right hand of God.' And that exaltation is to us the token that there He has received from the Father the Spirit, whom He promised to send when He left us. Therefore it is He--this Jesus '--who has poured forth this,'--this new strange gift, the tokens of which you see flaming on each head, and hear bursting in praise from every tongue.

What triumphant emphasis is in that He'! Peter quotes Joel's word pour forth.' The prophet had said, as the mouthpiece of God, I will pour forth'; Peter unhesitatingly transfers the word to Jesus. We must not assume in him at this stage a fully-developed consciousness of our Lord's divine nature, but neither must we blink the tremendous assumption which he feels warranted in making, that the exaltation of Jesus to the right hand of God meant His exercising the power which belonged to God Himself.

In Acts 2:34, he stays for a moment to establish by prophecy that the Ascension, of which he had for the first time spoken in Acts 2:33, is part of the prophetic characteristics of the Messiah. His demonstration runs parallel with his preceding one as to the Resurrection. He quotes Psalm 110., which he had learned to do from his Master, and just as he had argued about the prediction of Resurrection, that the dead Psalmist's words could not apply to himself, and must therefore apply to the Messiah; so he concludes that it was not' David' who was called by Jehovah to sit as Lord' on His right hand.

If not David, it could only be the Messiah who was thus invested with Lordship, and exalted as participator of the throne of the Most High.

Then comes the final thrust of the spear, for which all the discourse has been preparing. The Apostle rises to the full height of his great commission, and sets the trumpet to his mouth, summoning all the house of Israel,' priests, rulers, and all the people, to acknowledge his Master. He proclaims his supreme dignity and Messiahship. He is the Lord' of whom the Psalmist sang, and the prophet declared that whoever called on His name should be saved; and He is the Christ for whom Israel looked.

Last of all, he sets in sharp contrast what God had done with Jesus, and what Israel had done, and the barb of his arrow lies in the last words, whom ye crucified.' And this bold champion of Jesus, this undaunted arraigner of a nation's crimes, was the man who, a few weeks before, had quailed before a maid-servant's saucy tongue! What made the change? Will anything but the Resurrection and Pentecost account for the psychological transformation effected in him and the other Apostles?

II. No Wonder That They Were Pricked In Their Heart'!

Such a thrust must have gone deep, even where the armour of prejudice was thick. The scene they had witnessed, and the fiery words of explanation, taken together, produced incipient conviction, and the conviction produced alarm. How surely does the first glimpse of Jesus as Christ and Lord set conscience to work! The question, What shall we do? is the beginning of conversion. The acknowledgment of Jesus which does not lead to it is shallow and worthless. The most orthodox accepter, so far as intellect goes, of the gospel, who has not been driven by it to ask his own duty in regard to it, and what he is to do to receive its benefits, and to escape from his sins, has not accepted it at all.

Peter's answer lays down two conditions: repentance and baptism. The former is often taken in too narrow a sense as meaning sorrow for sin, whereas it means a change of disposition or mind, which will be accompanied, no doubt, with godly sorrow,' but is in itself deeper than sorrow, and is the turning away of heart and will from past love and practice of evil. The second, baptism, is in the name of Jesus Christ,' or more accurately, upon the name,'-- that is, on the ground of the revealed character of Jesus. That necessarily implies faith in that Name; for, without such faith, the baptism would not be on the ground of the Name. The two things are regarded as inseparable, being the inside and the outside of the Christian discipleship. Repentance, faith, baptism, these three, are called for by Peter.

But remission of sins' is not attached to the immediately preceding clause, so as that baptism is said to secure remission, but to the whole of what goes before in the sentence. Obedience to the requirements would bring the same gift to the obedient as the disciples had received; for it would make them disciples also. But, while repentance and baptism which presupposed faith were the normal, precedent conditions of the Spirit's bestowal, the case of Cornelius, where the Spirit was given before baptism, forbids the attempt to link the rite and the divine gift more closely together.

The Apostle was eager to share the gift. The more we have of the Spirit, the more shall we desire that others may have Him, and the more sure shall we be that He is meant for all. So Peter went on to base his assurance, that his hearers might all possess the Spirit, on the universal destination of the promise. Joel had said, on all flesh'; Peter declares that word to point downwards through all generations, and outwards to all nations. How swiftly had he grown in grasp of the sweep of Christ's work! How far beneath that moment of illumination some of his subsequent actions fell!

We have only a summary of his exhortations, the gist of which was earnest warning to separate from the fate of the nation by separating in will and mind from its sins. Swift conviction followed the Spirit-given words, as it ever will do when the speaker is filled with the Holy Spirit, and has therefore a tongue of fire. Three thousand new disciples were made that day, and though there must have been many superficial adherents, and none with much knowledge, it is perhaps not fanciful to see in Luke's speaking of them as souls' a hint that, in general, the acceptance of Jesus as Messiah was deep and real. Not only were throe thousand names' added to the hundred and twenty, but three thousand souls.

III. The Fair Picture Of The Morning Brightness, So Soon Overclouded, So Long Lost, Follows.

First, the narrative tells how the raw converts were incorporated in the community, and assimilated to its character. They, too, continued steadfastly' (Acts 1:14). Note the four points enumerated: teaching,' which would be principally instruction in the life of Jesus and His Messianic dignity, as proved by prophecy; fellowship,' which implies community of disposition and oneness of heart manifested in outward association; breaking of bread,'--that is, the observance of the Lord's Supper; and the prayers,' which were the very life-breath of the infant Church (Acts 1:14).

Thus oneness in faith and in love, participation in the memorial feast and in devotional acts bound the new converts to the original believers, and trained them towards maturity. These are still the methods by which a sudden influx of converts is best dealt with, and babes in Christ nurtured to full growth. Alas! that so often churches do not know what to do with novices when they come in numbers.

A wider view of the state of the community as a whole closes the chapter. It is the first of several landing-places, as it were, on which Luke pauses to sum up an epoch. A reverent awe laid hold of the popular mind, which was increased by the miraculous powers of the Apostles. The Church will produce that impression on the world in proportion as it is manifestly filled with the Spirit. Do we? The so-called community of goods was not imposed by commandment, as is plain from Peter's recognition of Ananias' right to do as he chose with his property. The facts that Mark's mother, Mary, had a house of her own, and that Barnabas, her relative, is specially signalised as having sold his property, prove that it was not universal. It was an irrepressible outcrop of the brotherly feeling that filled all hearts. Christ has not come to lay down laws, but to give impulses. Compelled communism is not the repetition of that oneness of sympathy which effloresced in the bright flower of this common possession of individual goods. But neither is the closed purse, closed because the heart is shut, which puts to shame so much profession of brotherhood, justified because the liberality of the primitive disciples was not by constraint nor of obligation, but willing and spontaneous.

Acts 2:46-47 add an outline of the beautiful daily life of the community, which was, like their liberality, the outcome of the feeling of brotherhood, intensified by the sense of the gulf between them and the crooked generation from which they had separated themselves. Luke shows it on two sides. Though they had separated from the nation, they clung to the Temple services, as they continued to do till the end. They had not come to clear consciousness of all that was involved in their discipleship. It was not God's will that the new spirit should violently break with the old letter. Convulsions are not His way, except as second-best. The disciples had to stay within the fold of Israel, if they were to influence Israel. The time of outward parting between the Temple and the Church was far ahead yet.

But the truest life of the infant Church was not nourished in the Temple, but in the privacy of their homes. They were one family, and lived as such. Their breaking bread at home' includes both their ordinary meals and the Lord's Supper; for in these first days every meal, at least the evening meal of every day, was hallowed by having the Supper as a part of it. Each meal was thus a religious act, a token of brotherhood, and accompanied with praise. Surely then men did eat angels' food,' and on platter and cup was written Holiness to the Lord.' The ideal of human fellowship was realised, though but for a moment, and on a small scale. It was inevitable that divergences should arise, but it was not inevitable that the Church should depart so far from the brief brightness of its dawn. Still the sweet concordant brotherhood of these morning hours witnesses what Christian love can do, and prophesies what shall yet be and shall not pass.

No wonder that such a Church won favour with all the people! We hear nothing of its evangelising activity, but its life was such that, without recorded speech, multitudes were drawn into so sweet a fellowship. If we were like the Pentecostal Christians, we should attract wearied souls out of the world's Babel into the calm home where love and brotherhood reigned, and God would add' to us day by day those that were being saved.'

Maclaren: Act 2:36

The Name Above Every Name

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.'--Acts 2:36.

IT is no part of my purpose at this time to consider the special circumstances under which these words were spoken, nor even to enter upon an exposition of their whole scope. I select them for one reason, the occurrence in them of the three names by which we designate our Saviour--Jesus, Lord, Christ. To us they are very little more than three proper names; they were very different to these men who listened to the characteristically vehement discourse of the Apostle Peter. It wanted some courage to stand up at Pentecost and proclaim on the housetop what he had spoken in the ear long ago, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God! To most of his listeners to say Jesus is the Christ' was folly, and to say Jesus is the Lord' was blasphemy.

The three names are names of the same Person, but they proclaim altogether different aspects of His work and His character. The name Jesus' is the name of the Man, and brings to us a Brother; the name Christ' is the name of office, and brings to us a Redeemer; the name Lord' is the name of dignity, and brings to us a King.

I. First, Then, The Name Jesus Is The Name Of The Man, And Tells Us Of A Brother.

There were many men in Palestine who bore the name of Jesus' when He bore it. We find that one of the early Christians had it; and it comes upon us with almost a shock when we read that Jesus, called Justus,' was the name of one of the friends of the Apostle Paul (Col. 4:11). But, through reverence on the part of Christians, and through horror on the part of Jews, the name ceased to be a common one; and its disappearance from familiar use has hid from us the fact of its common employment at the time when our Lord bore it. Though it was given to Him as indicative of His office of saving His people from their sins, yet none of all the crowds who knew Him as Jesus of Nazareth supposed that in His name there was any greater significance than in those of the Simons,' Johns,' and Judahs' in the circle of His disciples.

Now the use of Jesus as the proper name of our Lord is very noticeable. In the Gospels, as a rule, it stands alone hundreds of times, whilst in combination with any other of the titles it is rare. Jesus Christ,' for instance, only occurs, if I count aright, twice in Matthew, once in Mark, twice in John. But if you turn to the Epistles and the latter books of the Scriptures, the proportions are reversed. There you have a number of instances of the occurrence of such combinations as Jesus Christ,' Christ Jesus,' The Lord Jesus,' Christ the Lord,' and more rarely the full solemn title, The Lord Jesus Christ,' but the occurrence of the proper name Jesus' alone is the exception. So far as I know, there are only some thirty or forty instances of its use singly in the whole of the books of the New Testament outside of the four Evangelists. The occasions where it is used are all of them occasions in which one may see that the writer's intention is to put strong emphasis, for some reason or other, on the Manhood of our Lord Jesus, and to assert, as broadly as may be, His entire participation with us in the common conditions of our human nature, corporeal and mental.

And I think I shall best bring out the meaning and worth of the name by putting a few of these instances before you.

For example, more than once we find phrases like these: we believe that Jesus died,' having therefore boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,' and the like--which emphasise His death as the death of a man like ourselves, and bring us close to the historical reality of His human pains and agonies for us. Christ died' is a statement which makes the purpose and efficacy of His death more plain, but' Jesus died' shows us His death as not only the work of the appointed Messiah, but as the act of our brother man, the outcome of His human love, and never rightly to be understood if His work be thought of apart from His personality.

There is brought into view, too, prominently, the side of Christ's sufferings which we are all apt to forget--the common human side of His agonies and His pains. I know that a certain school of preachers, and some unctuous religious hymns, and other forms of composition, dwell, a great deal too much for reverence, upon the mere physical aspect of Christ's sufferings. But the temptation, I believe, with most of us is to dwell too little upon that,--to argue about the death of Christ, to think about it as a matter of speculation, to regard it as a mysterious power, to look upon it as an official act of the Messiah who was sent into the world for us; and to forget that He bore a manhood like our own, a body that was impatient of pains and wounds and sufferings, and a human life which, like all human lives, naturally recoiled and shrank from the agony of death.

And whilst, therefore, the great message, It is Christ that died,' is ever to be pondered, we have also to think with sympathy and gratitude on the homelier representation coming nearer to our hearts, which proclaims that Jesus died.' Let us not forget the Brother's manhood that had to agonise and to suffer and to die as the price of our salvation.

Again, when the Scripture would set our Lord before us, as in His humanity, our pattern and example, it sometimes uses this name, in order to give emphasis to the thought of His Manhood--as, for example, in the words of the Epistle to the Hebrews, looking unto Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith.' That is to say--a mighty stimulus to all brave perseverance in our efforts after higher Christian nobleness lies in the vivid and constant realisation of the true manhood of our Lord, as the type of all goodness, as having Himself lived by faith, and that in a perfect degree and manner. We are to turn away our eyes from contemplating all other lives and motives, and to look off from them to Him. In all our struggles let us think of Him. Do not take poor human creatures for your ideal of excellence, nor tune your harps to their keynotes. To imitate men is degradation, and is sure to lead to deformity. None of them is a safe guide. Black veins are in the purest marble, and flaws in the most lustrous diamonds. But to imitate Jesus is freedom, and to be like Him is perfection. Our code of morals is His life. He is the Ideal incarnate. The secret of all progress is, Run--looking unto Jesus.'

Then, again, we have His manhood emphasised when His sympathy is to be commended to our hearts. The great High Priest, who is passed into the heavens' is Jesus' who was in all points tempted like as we are.' To every sorrowing soul, to all men burdened with heavy tasks, unwelcome duties, pains and sorrows of the imagination, or of the heart, or of memory, or of physical life, or of circumstances--to all there comes the thought, Every ill that flesh is heir to' He knows by experience, and in the Man Jesus we find not only the pity of a God, but the sympathy of a Brother.

When one of our princes goes for an afternoon into the slums in East London, everybody says, and says deservedly, right! and princely!' This prince has learned pity in the huts where poor men lie,' and knows by experience all their squalor and misery. The Man Jesus is the sympathetic Priest. The Rabbis, who did not usually see very far into the depth of things, yet caught a wonderful glimpse when they said: Messias will be found sitting outside the gate of the city amongst the lepers.' That is where He sits; and the perfectness of His sympathy, and the completeness of His identification of Himself with all our tears and our sorrows, are taught us when we read that our High Priest is not merely Christ the Official, but Jesus the Man.

And then we find such words as these: If we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him': I think any one that reads with sympathy must feel how very much closer to our hearts that consolation comes, Jesus rose again,' than even the mighty word which the Apostle uses on another occasion, Christ is risen from the dead.' The one tells us of the risen Redeemer, the other tells us of the risen Brother. And wherever there are sorrowing souls, enduring loss and following their dear ones into the darkness with yearning hearts, they are comforted when they feel that the beloved dead lie down beside their Brother, and with their Brother they shall rise again.

So, again, most strikingly, and yet somewhat singularly, in the words of Scripture which paint most loftily the exaltation of the risen Saviour to the right hand of God, and His wielding of absolute power and authority, it is the old human name that is used; as if the writers would bind together the humiliation and the exaltation, and were holding up hands of wonder at the thought that a Man had risen thus to the Throne of the Universe. What an emphasis and glow of hope there is in such words as these: We see not yet all things put under Him, but we see Jesus '--the very Man that was here with us, crowned with glory and honour.' So in the Book of the Revelation the chosen name for Him who sits amidst the glories of the heavens, and settles the destinies of the universe, and orders the course of history, is Jesus. As if the Apostle would assure us that the face which looked down upon him from amidst the blaze of the glory was indeed the face that he knew long ago upon earth, and the breast that was girded with a golden girdle' was the breast upon which he so often had leaned his happy head.

So the ties that bind us to the Man Jesus should be the human bonds that knit us to one another, transferred to Him and purified and strengthened. All that we have failed to find in men we can find in Him. Human wisdom has its limits, but here is a Man whose word is truth, who is Himself the truth. Human love is sometimes hollow, often impotent; it looks down upon us, as a great thinker has said, like the Venus of Mile, that lovely statue, smiling in pity, but it has no arms. But here is a love that is mighty to help, and on which we can rely without disappointment or loss. Human excellence is always limited and imperfect, but here is One whom we may imitate and be pure. So let us do like that poor woman in the Gospel story--bring our precious alabaster box of ointment--the love of these hearts of ours, which is the most precious thing we have to give. The box of ointment that we have so often squandered upon unworthy heads--let us come and pour it upon His, not unmingled with our tears, and anoint Him, our beloved and our King. This Man has loved each of us with a brother's heart; let us love Him with all our hearts.

II. So Much For The First Name.

The second--Christ' --is the name of office, and brings to us a Redeemer.

I need not dwell at any length upon the original significance and force of the name; it is familiar, of course, to us all. It stands as a transference into Greek of the Hebrew Messias; the one and the other meaning, as we all know, the Anointed.' But what is the meaning of claiming for Jesus that He is anointed? A sentence will answer the question. It means that He fulfils all which the inspired imagination of the great ones of the past had seen in that dim figure that rose before prophet and psalmist. It means that He is anointed or inspired by the divine indwelling to be Prophet, Priest, and King all over the world. It means that He is--though the belief had faded away from the minds of His generation--a sufferer whilst a Prince, and appointed to turn away unrighteousness' from the world, and not from' Jacob' only, by a sacrifice and a death.

I cannot see less in the contents of the Jewish idea, the prophetic idea, of the Messias, than these points" divine inspiration or anointing; a sufferer who is to redeem; the fulfiller of all the rapturous visions of psalmist and of prophet in the past.

And so, when Peter stood up amongst that congregation of wondering strangers and scowling Pharisees, and said, The Man that died on the Cross, the Rabbi-peasant from half-heathen Galilee, is the Person to whom Law and Prophets have been pointing,'--no wonder that no one believed him except those whose hearts were touched, for it is never possible for the common mind, at any epoch, to believe that a man who stands beside them is very much bigger than themselves. Great men have always to die, and get a halo of distance around them, before their true stature can be seen.

And now two remarks are all I can afford myself upon this point, and one is this: the hearty recognition of His Messiahship is the centre of all discipleship. The earliest and the simplest Christian creed, which yet--like the little brown roll in which the infant beech-leaves He folded up--contains in itself all the rest, was this: Jesus is Christ.' Although it is no part of my business to say how much imperfection and confusion of head comprehension may co-exist with a heart acceptance of Jesus that saves a soul from sin, yet I cannot in faithfulness to my own convictions conceal my belief that he who contents himself with Jesus' and does not grasp Christ' has cast away the most valuable and characteristic part of the Christianity which he professes. Surely a most simple inference is that a Christian is at least a man who recognises the Christship of Jesus. And I press that upon you, my friends. It is not enough for the sustenance of your own souls and for the cultivation of a vigorous religious life that men should admire, howsoever profoundly and deeply, the humanity of the Lord unless that humanity leads them on to see the office of the Messiah to whom their whole hearts cleave. Jesus is the Christ' is the minimum Christian creed.

And then, still further, let me remind you how the recognition of Jesus as Christ is essential to giving its full value to the facts of the manhood. Jesus died!' Yes. What then? What is that to me? Is that all that I have to say? If His is simply a human death, like all others, I want to know what makes the story of it a Gospel. I want to know what more interest I have in it than I have in the death of Socrates, or in the death of any man or woman whose name was in the obituary column of yesterday's newspaper. Jesus died.' That is a fact. What is wanted to turn the fact into a gospel? That I shall know who it was that died, and why He died. I declare unto you the gospel which I preach,' Paul says, how that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures.' The belief that the death of Jesus was the death of the Christ is needful in order that it shall be the means of my deliverance from the burden of sin. If it be only the death of Jesus, it is beautiful, pathetic, as many another martyr's has been, but if it be the death of Christ, then my faith can lay her hand' on that great Sacrifice and know her guilt was there.'

So in regard to His perfect example. If we only see His manhood when we are looking unto Jesus,' the contemplation of His perfection would be as paralysing as spectacles of supreme excellence usually are. But when we can say,' Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example,' and so can deepen the thought of His Manhood into that of His Messiahship, and the conception of His work as example into that of His work as sacrifice, we can hope that His divine power will dwell in us to mould our lives to the likeness of His human life of perfect obedience.

So in regard to His Resurrection and glorious Ascension to the right hand of God. We have not only to think of the solitary man raised from the grave and caught up to the throne. If it were only Jesus' who rose and ascended, His Resurrection and Ascension might be as much to us as the raising of Lazarus, or the rapture of Elijah--namely, a demonstration that death did not destroy conscious being, and that a man could rise to heaven; but they would be no more. But if Christ is risen from the dead,' He is become the first-fruits of them that slept.' If Jesus has gone up on high, others may or may not follow in His train. He may show that manhood is not incapable of elevation to heaven, but has no power to draw others up after Him. But if Christ is gone up, He is gone to prepare a place for us, not to fill a solitary throne, and His Ascension is the assurance that He will lift us too to dwell with Him and share His triumph over death and sin.

Most of the blessedness and beauty of His Example, all the mystery and meaning of His Death, and all the power of His Resurrection, depend on the fact that it is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God.'

III. The Lord Is The Name Of Dignity And Brings Before Us The King.

There are three grades, so to speak, of dignity expressed by this one word Lord' in the New Testament. The lowest is that in which it is almost the equivalent of our own English title of respectful courtesy, Sir,' in which sense it is often used in the Gospels, and applied to our Lord as to many other of the persons there. The second is that in which it expresses dignity and authority--and in that sense it is frequently applied to Christ. The third and highest is that in which it is the equivalent of the Old Testament Lord,' as a divine name; in which sense also it is applied to Christ in the New Testament.

The first and last of these may be left out of consideration now: the central one is the meaning of the word here. I have only time to touch upon two thoughts--to connect this name of dignity first with one and then with the other of the two names that we have already considered.

Jesus is Lord, that is to say, wonderful as it is, His manhood is exalted to supreme dignity. It is the teaching of the New Testament, that in Jesus, the Child of Mary, our nature sits on the throne of the universe and rules over all things. Those rude herdsmen, brothers of Joseph, who came into Pharaoh's palace--strange contrast to their tents! --there found their brother ruling over that ancient and highly civilised land! We have the Man Jesus for the Lord over all. Trust His dominion and rejoice in His rule, and bow before His authority. Jesus is Lord.

Christ is Lord. That is to say: His sovereign authority and dominion are built upon the fact of His being Deliverer, Redeemer, Sacrifice. His Kingdom is a Kingdom that rests upon His suffering. Wherefore God also hath exalted Him, and given Him a Name that is above every name.'

It is because He wears a vesture dipped in blood, that on the vesture is the name written "King of kings, and Lord of lords." It is because He shall deliver the needy when he crieth,' as the prophetic psalm has it, that all kings shall fall down before Him and all nations shall serve Him.' Because He has given His life for the world He is the Master of the World. His humanity is raised to the throne because His humanity stooped to the cross. As long as men's hearts can be touched by absolute unselfish surrender, and as long as they can know the blessedness of responsive surrender, so long will He who gave Himself for the world be the Sovereign of the world, and the First-born from the dead be the Prince of all the kings of the earth.

And so, dear friends, our thoughts to-day all point to this lesson--do not you content yourselves with a maimed Christ. Do not tarry in the Manhood; do not think it enough to cherish reverence for the nobility of His soul, the gentle wisdom of His words, the beauty of His character, the tenderness of His compassion. All these will be insufficient for your needs. There is more in His mission than these--even His death for you and for all men. Take Him for your Christ, but do not lose the Person in the Work, any more than you lose the work in the Person. And be not content with an intellectual recognition of Him, but bring Him the faith which cleaves to Him and His work as its only hope and peace, and the love which, because of His work as Christ, flows out to the beloved Person who has done it all Thus loving Jesus and trusting Christ, you will bring obedience to your Lord and homage to your King, and learn the sweetness and power of the name that is above every name '--the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

May we all be able, with clear and unfaltering conviction of our understandings and loving affiance of our whole souls, to repeat as our own the grand words in which so many centuries have proclaimed their faith--words which shed a spell of peacefulness over stormy lives, and fling a great light of hope into the black jaws of the grave: I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord!

Maclaren: Act 2:42

A Fourfold Cord

And they continued stedfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.'--Acts 2:42.

THE Early Church was not a pattern for us, and the idea of its greatly superior purity is very largely a delusion. But still, though that be true, the occasional glimpses that we get at intervals in the early chapters of this Book of the Acts of the Apostles do present a very instructive and beautiful picture of what a Christian society may be, and therefore of what Christian Churches and Christian individuals ought to be.

The words that I have read, however, are not the description of the demeanour of the whole community, but of that portion of it which had been added so swiftly to the original nucleus on the Day of Pentecost. Think, on the morning of that day the number of the names was one hundred and twenty,' on the evening of that day it was three thousand over that number--a sufficiently swift and large increase to have swamped the original nucleus, unless there had been a great power of assimilation to itself lodged in that little body. These new converts held to the Apostolic doctrine' and fellowship,' and to breaking of bread' and to prayers,' and so became homogeneous with the others, and all worked to one end.

Now, these four points which are signalised in this description may well afford us material for consideration. They give us the ideal of a Church's inner life, which in the divine order should precede, and be the basis of, a Church's work in the world. But, while we speak of an ideal for a Church, let us not forget that it is realised only by the lives of individuals being conformed to it.

I. They Continued Steadfastly In The Apostles' Doctrine.'

The first point, which is fundamental to all the others, is They continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine.'

An earnest desire after fuller knowledge is the basis of all healthy Christian life. We cannot realise, without a great effort, the ignorance of these new converts. Parthians and Medes and Elamites,' and Jews gathered from every corner of the Roman world, they had come up to Jerusalem, and the bulk of them knew no more about Christ and Christianity than what they picked up out of Peter's sermon on the Day of Pentecost. But that was enough to change their hearts and their wills and to lead them to a real faith. And though the contents of their faith were very incomplete, the power of their faith was very great. For there is no necessary connection between the amount believed and the grasp with which it is held. Believing, they were eager for more light to be poured on to their half-seeing eyes. They had no Gospels, they had no written record, they had no means of learning anything about the faith which they were now professing except listening to one or other of the original Eleven, with the addition of any of the other' old disciples '--that is, early disciples --who might perchance have equal claims to be listened to as witnesses from the beginning.' We shall very much misunderstand the meaning of the words here, if we suppose that these novices were dosed with theological instruction, or that the Apostles' doctrine' consisted of such fully developed truths as we find later on in Paul's writings. If you will look at the first sermons that Peter is recorded as having delivered, in the early chapters of the Acts, you will find that he by no means enunciates a definite theology such as he unfolds in his later Epistle. There is no word about the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ; His designation is Thy holy child Jesus.' There is no word about the atoning nature of Christ's sacrifice; His death is simply the great crime of the Jewish people, and His Resurrection the great divine fact witnessing to the truth of His Messiahship. All that which we now regard, and rightly regard, as the very centre and living focus of divine truth was but beginning to shine out on the Apostles' minds, or rather to gather itself into form, and to shape itself by slow degrees into propositions. The Apostles' teaching '--for' doctrine' does not convey to modern ears what Luke meant by the word--must have been very largely, if not exclusively, of the same kind as is preserved to us in the four Gospels, and especially in the first three of them. The recital to these listeners, to whom it was all so fresh and strange and transcendent, of the story that has become worn and commonplace to us by its familiarity, of Christ in His birth, Christ in His gentleness, Christ in His deeds, Christ in the deep words that the Apostles were only beginning to understand; Christ in His Death, Resurrection, and Ascension--these were the themes on the narration of which this company of three thousand waited with such eagerness.

But, of course, there was necessarily involved in the story a certain amount of what we now call doctrine--that is, theological teaching--because one cannot tell the story of Jesus Christ, as it is told in the four Gospels, without impressing upon the hearers the conviction that His nature was divine and that His death was a sacrifice. Beyond these truths we know not how far the Apostles went. To these, perhaps, they did not at first rise. But whether they did so or no, and although the facts that the hearers were thus eager to receive, and treasured when they received, are the commonplaces of our Sunday-schools, and quite uninteresting to many of us, the spirit which marked these early converts is the spirit that must lie at the foundation of progressive and healthy Christianity in us. The consciousness of our own ignorance, of the great sweep of God's revealed mind and will, the eager desire to fill up the gaps in the circle, and to widen the diameter, of our knowledge, and the consequent steadfastness and persistence of our continuance in the teachings--far fuller and deeper and richer and nobler than were heard in the upper room at Jerusalem by the first three thousand--which, through the divine Spirit and the experience of the Church for nineteen hundred years are available for us, ought to characterise us all.

Now, dear friends, ask yourselves the question very earnestly, Does this desire of fuller Christian knowledge at all mark my Christian character, and does it practically influence my Christian conduct and life? There are thousands of men and women in all our churches who know no more about the rich revelation of God in Jesus Christ than they did on that day long, long ago, when first they began to apprehend that He was the Saviour of their souls. When I sometimes get glimpses into the utter Biblical ignorance of educated members of my own and of other congregations, I am appalled; I do not wonder how we ministers do so little by our preaching, when the minds of the people to whom we speak are so largely in such a chaotic state in reference to Scriptural truth. I believe that there is an intolerance of plain, sober, instructive Christian teaching from the pulpit, which is one of the worst signs of the Christianity of this generation. And I believe that there are a terribly large number of professing Christians, and good people after a fashion, whose Bibles are as clean to-day, except on one or two favourite pages, as they were when they came out of the bookseller's shop years and years ago. You will never be strong Christians, you will never be happy ones, until you make conscience of the study of God's Word and continue steadfastly in the Apostles' teaching.' You may produce plenty of emotional Christianity, and of busy and sometimes fussy work without it, but you will not get depth. I sometimes think that the complaint of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews might be turned upside down nowadays. He says: When for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles.' Nowadays we might say in Sunday-schools and other places of church work: When for the time ye ought to be learners, you have taken to teaching before you know what you are teaching, and so neither you nor your scholars will profit much.' The vase should be full before you begin to empty it.

Again, there ought to be, and we ought to aim after, an equable temper of mutual brotherhood conquering selfishness.

They continued in the Apostles' doctrine and in fellowship.' Fellowship' here, as I take it, applies to community of feeling. A verse or two afterwards it is applied to community of goods, but we have nothing to do with that subject at present. What is meant is that these three thousand, as was most natural, cut off altogether from their ancient associations, finding themselves at once separated by a great gull from their nation and its hopes and its religion, were driven together as sheep are when wolves are prowling around. And, being individually weak, they held on by one another, so that many weaknesses might make a strength, and glimmering embers raked together might break into a flame.

Now, all these circumstances, or almost all of them, that drove the primitive believers together, are at an end, and the tendencies of this day are rather to drive Christian people apart than to draw them together. Differences of position, occupation, culture, ways of looking at things, views of Christian truth and the like, all come powerfully in to the reinforcement of the natural selfishness which tempts us all, unless the grace of God overcomes it. Although we do not want any hysterical or histrionic presentation of Christian sympathy and brotherhood, we do need--far more than any of us have awakened to the consciousness of the need--for the health of our own souls we need to make definite efforts to cultivate more of that sense of Christian brotherhood with all that hold the same Lord Christ, and to realise this truth: that they and we, however separate, are nearer one another than are we and those nearest to us who do not share in our Christian faith.

I do not dwell upon this point. It is one on which it is easy to gush, and it has got a bad name because there has been so much unreal and sickly talk about it. But if any Christian man will honestly try to cultivate the brotherly feeling which my text suggests, and to which our common relation to Jesus Christ binds us, and will try it in reference to A, B, or C, whom he does not much like, with whose ways he has no kind of sympathy, whom he believes to be a heretic, and who perhaps returns the belief about him with interest, he will find it is a pretty sharp test of his Christian principle. Let us be real, at any rate, and not pretend to have more love than we really, have in our hearts. And let us remember that he that loveth Him that begat, loveth Him also that is begotten of Him.'

II. Another Characteristic Which Comes Out In The Words Before Us Is The Blending Of Worship With Life.

They continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine, and in breaking of bread.' Commentators who can only see one thing at a time--and there are a good many of that species--have got up great discussions as to whether this phrase means eating ordinary meals or partaking of the Lord's Supper. I venture to say it means both, because, clearly enough, in the beginning, the common meal was hallowed by what we now call the Lord's Supper being associated with it, and every day's evening repast was eaten in remembrance of Him.'

So, naturally, and without an idea of anything awful or sacred about the rite, the first Christians, when they went home after a hard day's work and sat down to take their own suppers, blessed the bread and the wine, and whether they ate or drank, did the one and the other in remembrance of Him.'

The gradual growth of the sentiment attaching to the Lord's Supper, until it reached the portentous height of regarding it as a tremendous sacrifice,' which could only be administered by priests with ordained hands in Apostolic succession, can be partly traced even in New Testament times. The Lord's Supper began as an appendage to, or rather as a heightening of, the evening meal, and at first, as this chapter tells us in a subsequent verse, was observed day by day. Then, before the epoch of the Acts of the Apostles is ended, we find it has become a weekly celebration, and forms part of the service on the first day of the week. But even when the observance had ceased to be daily, the association with an ordinary meal continued, and that led to the disorders at Corinth which Paul rebuked, and which would have been impossible if later ideas of the Lord's Supper had existed then.

The history of the transformation of that simple Supper into the bloodless sacrifice' of the Mass, and all the mischief consequent thereon, does not concern us now. But it does concern us to note that these first believers hallowed common things by doing them, and common food by partaking of it, with the memory of His great sacrifice in their minds. The poorest fare, the coarsest bread, the sourest wine, on the humblest table, became a memorial of that dear Lord. Religion and life, the domestic and the devout, were so closely braided together that when a household sat at table it was both a family and a church; and while they were eating their meat for the strength of their body, they were partaking of the memorial of their dying Lord.

Is your house like that? Is your daily life like that? Do you bring the sacred and the secular as close together as that? Are the dying words of your Master, This do in remembrance of Me,' written by you over everything you do? And so is all life worship, and all worship hope?

III. The Last Thing Here Is Habitual Devotion.

I suppose the disciples had no forms of set Christian prayers. They still used the Jewish liturgy, for we read that they continued daily with one accord in the Temple.' I am sure that no two things can be less like one another than the worship of the primitive Church and the worship, say, of one of our congregations. Did you ever try to paint for yourselves, for instance, the scene described in the First Epistle to the Corinthians? When they came together in their meetings for worship, every one had a psalm, a doctrine, an interpretation.' Let the prophets speak, by ones, or at most by twos'; and if another gets up to interrupt, let the first speaker sit down. Paul goes on to say, Let all things be done decently and in order.' So there must have been tendencies to disorder, and much at which some of our modern ecclesiastical martinets would have been very much scandalised as unbecoming.' Wise men are in no haste to change forms. Forms change of themselves when their users change; but it would be a good day for Christendom if the faith and devoutness of a community of believers such as we, for instance, profess to be, were so strong and so demanding expression as that, instead of my poor voice continually sounding here, every one of you had a psalm or a doctrine, and every one of you were able and impelled to speak out of the fulness of the Spirit which God poured into you. It will come some day; it must come if Christendom is not to die of its own dignity. But we do not need to hurry matters, only let us remember that unless a Church continues steadfast in prayer it is worth very little.

Now, dear brethren, it is said about us Free Churchmen that we think a great deal too much of preaching and a great deal too little of the prayers of the congregation. That is a stock criticism. I am bound to say that there is a grain of truth in it, and that there is not, with too many of our congregations, as lofty a conception of the power and blessedness of the united prayers of the congregation as there ought to be, or else you would not hear about introductory services.' Introductory to what? Do we speak to God merely by way of preface to one of us talking to his brethren? Is that the proper order? They continued steadfastly in the Apostles' teaching,' no doubt; but also steadfastly in prayer.' I pray you to try to make this picture of the Pentecostal converts the ideal of your own lives, and to do your best to help forward the time when it shall be the reality in this church, and in every other society of professing Christians.

Maclaren: Act 2:47

A Pure Church An Increasing Church

And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.'--Acts 2:47. And the Lord added to them day by day those that were being saved.'--(R.V.)

You observe that the principal alterations of these words in the Revised Version are two: the one the omission of the church,' the other the substitution of were being saved' for such as should be saved.' The former of these changes has an interest as suggesting that at the early period referred to the name of the church' had not yet been definitely attached to the infant community, and that the word afterwards crept into the text at a time when ecclesiasticism had become a great deal stronger than it was at the date of the writing of the Acts of the Apostles. The second of the changes is of more importance. The Authorised Version's rendering suggests that salvation is a future thing, which in one aspect is partially true. The Revised Version, which is also by far the more literally accurate, suggests the other idea, that salvation is a process going on all through the course of a Christian man's life. And that carries very large and important lessons.

I. The Profound Conception Which The Writer Had Of The Present Action Of The Ascended Christ.

I ask you to notice here, first, the profound conception which the writer had of the present action of the ascended Christ. The Lord added to them day by day those that were being saved.'

Then Christ (for it is He that is here spoken of as the Lord), the living, ascended Christ, was present in, and working with, that little community of believing souls. You will find that the thought of a present Saviour, who is the life-blood of the Church on earth, and the spring of action for all good that is done in it and by it, runs through the whole of this Book of the Acts of the Apostles. The keynote is struck in its first verses: The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began to do and to teach, until the day in which He was taken up.' That is the description of Luke's Gospel, and it implies that the Acts of the Apostles is the second treatise, which tells all that Jesus continued to do and teach after that He was taken up. So the Lord, the ascended Christ, is the true theme and hero of this book. It is He, for instance, who sends down the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. It is He whom the dying martyr sees standing at the right hand of God,' ready to help. It is He who appears to the persecutor on the road to Damascus. It is He who sends Paul and his company to preach in Europe. It is He who opens hearts for the reception of their message. It is He who stands by the Apostle in a vision, and bids him be of good cheer,' and go forth upon his work. Thus, at every crisis in the history of the Church, it is the Lord --that is to say, Christ Himself--who is revealed as working in them and for them, the ascended but yet ever-present Guide, Counsellor, Inspirer, Protector, and Rewarder of them that put their trust in Him. So here it is He that adds to the Church daily them that were being saved.'

I believe, dear brethren, that modern Christianity has far too much lost the vivid impression of this present Christ as actually dwelling and working among us. What is good in us and what is bad in us conspire to make us think more of the past work of an ascended Christ than of the present work of an indwelling Christ. We cannot think too much of that Cross by which He has laid the foundation for the salvation and reconciliation of all the world; but we may easily think too exclusively of it, and so fix our thoughts upon that work which He completed when on Calvary He said, It is finished! as to forget the continual work which will never be finished until His Church is perfected, and the world is redeemed. If we are a Church of Christ at all, we have Christ in very deed among us, and working through us and on us. And unless we have, in no mystical and unreal and metaphorical sense, but in the simplest and yet grandest prose reality, that living Saviour here in our hearts and in our fellowship, better that these walls were levelled with the ground, and this congregation scattered to the four winds of heaven. The present Christ is the life of His Church.

Notice, and that but for a moment, for I shall have to deal with it more especially at another part of this discourse,--the specific action which is here ascribed to Him. He adds to the Church, not we, not our preaching, not our eloquence, our fervour, our efforts. These may be the weapons in His hands, but the hand that wields the weapon gives it all its power to wound and to heal, and it is Christ Himself who, by His present energy, is here represented as being the Agent of all the good that is done by any Christian community, and the Builder-up of His Churches, in numbers and in power.

It is His will for, His ideal of, a Christian Church, that continuously it should be gathering into its fellowship those that are being saved. That is His meaning in the establishment of His Church upon earth, and that is His will concerning it and concerning us, and the question should press on every society of Christians: Does our reality correspond to Christ's ideal? Are we, as a portion of His great heritage, being continually replenished by souls that come to tell what God has done for them? Is there an unbroken flow of such into what we call our communion? I speak to you members of this church, and I ask you to ponder the question,--Is it so? and the other question, If it is not so, wherefore? The Lord added daily,'--why does not the Lord add daily to us?

II. Let Us Go To The Second Part Of This Text, And See If We Can Find An Answer.

Notice how emphatically there is brought out here the attractive power of an earnest and pure Church.

My text is the end of a sentence. What is the beginning of the sentence? Listen,--All that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the Temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added.' Yes; of course. Suppose you were like these people. Suppose this church and congregation bore stamped upon it, plain and deep as the broad arrow of the king, these characteristics--manifest fraternal unity, plain unselfish unworldliness, habitual unbroken devotion, gladness which had in it the solemnity of Heaven, and a transparent simplicity of life and heart, which knew nothing of by-ends and shabby, personal motives or distracting duplicity of purpose--do you not think that the Lord would add to you daily such as should be saved? Or, to put it into other words, wherever there is a little knot of men obviously held together by a living Christ, and obviously manifesting in their lives and characters the likeness of that Christ transforming and glorifying them, there will be drawn to them--by natural gravitation, I was going to say, but we may more correctly say, by the gravitation which is natural in the supernatural realm--souls that have been touched by the grace of the Lord, and souls to whom that grace has been brought the nearer by looking upon them. Wherever there is inward vigour of life there will be outward growth; and the Church which is pure, earnest, living will be a Church which spreads and increases.

Historically, it has always been the case that in God's Church seasons of expansion have followed upon seasons of deepened spiritual life on the part of His people. And the only kind of growth which is wholesome, and to be desired in a Christian community, is growth as a consequence of the revived religiousness of the individuals who make up the community.

And just in like manner as such a community will draw to it men who are like-minded, so it will repel from it all the formalist people. There are congregations that have the stamp of worldliness so deep upon them that any persons who want to be burdened with as little religion as may be respectable will find themselves at home there. And I come to you Christian people here, for whose Christian character I am in some sense and to some degree responsible, with this appeal: Do you see to it that, so far as your influence extends, this community of ours be such as that half-dead Christians will never think of coming near us, and those whose religion is tepid will be repelled from us, but that they who love the Lord Jesus Christ with earnest devotion and lofty consecration, and seek to live unworldly and saint-like lives, shall recognise in us men like-minded, and from whom they may draw help. I beseech you--if you will not misunderstand the expression--make your communion such that it will repel as well as attract; and that people will find nothing here to draw them to an easy religion of words and formalism, beneath which all vermin of worldliness and selfishness may lurk, but will recognise in us a church of men and women who are bent upon holiness, and longing for more and more conformity to the divine Master.

Now, if all this be true, it is possible for worldly and stagnant communities calling themselves' Churches' to thwart Christ's purpose, and to make it both impossible and undesirable that He should add to them souls for whom He has died. It is a solemn thing to feel that we may clog Christ's chariot-wheels, that there may be so little spiritual life in us, as a congregation, that, if I may so say, He dare not intrust us with the responsibility of guarding and keeping the young converts whom He loves and tends. We may not be fit to be trusted with them, and that may be why we do not get them. It may not be good for them that they should be dropped into the refrigerating atmosphere of such a church, and that may be why they do not come.

Depend upon it, brethren, that, far more than my preaching, your lives will determine the expansion of this church of ours. And if my preaching is pulling one way and your lives the other, and I have half an hour a week for talk and you have seven days for contradictory life, which of the two do you think is likely to win in the tug? I beseech you, take the words that I am now trying to speak, to yourselves. Do not pass them to the man in the next pew and think how well they fit him, but accept them as needed by you. And remember, that just as a bit of sealing-wax, if you rub it on your sleeve and so warm it, develops an attractive power, the Church which is warmed will draw many to itself. If the earlier words of this context apply to any Christian community, then certainly its blessed promise too will apply to it, and to such a church the Lord will add day by day them that are being saved.'

III. And Now, Lastly, Observe The Definition Given Here Of The Class Of Persons Gathered Into The Community.

I have already observed, in the earlier portion of this discourse, that here we have salvation represented as a process, a progressive thing which runs on all through life. In the New Testament there are various points of view from which that great idea of salvation is represented. It is sometimes spoken of as past, in so far as in the definite act of conversion and the first exercise of faith in Jesus Christ the whole subsequent evolution and development are involved, and the process of salvation has its beginning then, when a man turns to God. It is sometimes spoken of as present, in so far as the joy of deliverance from evil and possession of good, which is God, is realised day by day. It is sometimes spoken of as future, in so far as all the imperfect possession and pre-libations of salvation which we taste here on earth prophesy and point onwards to their own perfecting in the climax of heaven. But all these three points of view, past, present, and future, may be merged into this one of my text, which speaks of every saint on earth, from the infantile to the most mature, as standing in the same row, though at different points; walking on the same road, though advanced different distances; all participant of the same process of' being saved.'

Through all life the deliverance goes on, the deliverance from sin, the deliverance from wrath. The Christian salvation, then, according to the teaching of this emphatic phrase, is a process begun at conversion, carried on progressively through the life, and reaching its climax in another state. Day by day, through the spring and the early summer, the sun shines longer in the sky, and rises higher in the heavens; and the path of the Christian is as the shining light. Last year's greenwood is this year's hardwood; and the Christian, in like manner, has to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord and Saviour.' So these progressively, and, therefore, as yet imperfectly, saved people, were gathered into the Church.

Now I have but two things to say about that. If that be the description of the kind of folk that come into a Christian Church, the duties of that Church are very plainly marked. And the first great one is to see to it that the community help the growth of its members. There are Christian Churches--I do not say whether ours is one of them or not--into which, if a young plant is brought, it is pretty sure to be killed. The temperature is so low that the tender shoots are nipped as with frost, and die. I have seen people, coming all full of fervour and of faith, into Christian congregations, and finding that the average round them was so much lower than their own, that they have cooled down after a time to the fashionable temperature, and grown indifferent like their brethren. Let us, dear friends, remember that a Christian Church is a nursery of imperfect Christians, and, for ourselves and for one another, try to make our communion such as shall help shy and tender graces to unfold themselves, and woo out, by the encouragement of example, the lowest and the least perfect to lofty holiness and consecration like the Master's.

And if I am speaking to any in this congregation who hold aloof from Christian fellowship for more or less sufficient reasons, let me press upon them, in one word, that if they are conscious of a possession, however imperfect, of that incipient salvation, their place is thereby determined, and they are doing wrong if they do not connect themselves with some Christian Communion, and stand forth as members of Christ's Church.

And now one last word. I have tried to show you that salvation, in the New Testament, is regarded as a process. The opposite thing is a process too. There is a very awful contrast in one of Paul's Epistles. The preaching of the Cross is to them who are in the act of perishing foolishness; unto us who are being saved, it is the power of God.' These two processes start, as it were, from the same point, one by slow degrees and almost imperceptible motion, rising higher and higher, the other, by slow degrees and almost unconscious descent, sliding steadily and fatally downward ever further and further. And my point now is that in each of us one or other of these processes is going on. Either you are slowly rising or you are slipping down. Either a larger measure of the life of Christ, which is salvation, is passing into your hearts, or bit by bit you are dying like some man with creeping paralysis that begins at the extremities, and with fell, silent, inexorable footstep, advances further and further towards the citadel of the heart, where it lays its icy hand at last, and the man is dead. You are either being saved' or you are perishing.' No man becomes a devil all at once, and no man becomes an angel all at once. Trust yourself to Christ, and He will lift you to Himself; turn your back upon Him, as some of you are doing, and you will settle down, down, down in the muck and the mire of your own sensuality and selfishness, until at last the foul ooze spreads over your head, and you are lost in the bog for ever.

MHCC: Act 2:22-36

From this gift of the Holy Ghost, Peter preaches unto them Jesus: and here is the history of Christ. Here is an account of his death and sufferings, which they witnessed but a few weeks before. His death is considered as God's act; and of wonderful grace and wisdom. Thus Divine justice must be satisfied, God and man brought together again, and Christ himself glorified, according to an eternal counsel, which could not be altered. And as the people's act; in them it was an act of awful sin and folly. Christ's resurrection did away the reproach of his death; Peter speaks largely upon this. Christ was God's Holy One, sanctified and set apart to his service in the work of redemption. His death and sufferings should be, not to him only, but to all his, the entrance to a blessed life for evermore. This event had taken place as foretold, and the apostles were witnesses. Nor did the resurrection rest upon this alone; Christ had poured upon his disciples the miraculous gifts and Divine influences, of which they witnessed the effects. Through the Saviour, the ways of life are made known; and we are encouraged to expect God's presence, and his favour for evermore. All this springs from assured belief that Jesus is the Lord, and the anointed Saviour.

MHCC: Act 2:37-41

From the first delivery of that Divine message, it appeared that there was Divine power going with it; and thousands were brought to the obedience of faith. But neither Peter's words, nor the miracle they witnessed, could have produced such effects, had not the Holy Spirit been given. Sinners, when their eyes are opened, cannot but be pricked to the heart for sin, cannot but feel an inward uneasiness. The apostle exhorted them to repent of their sins, and openly to avow their belief in Jesus as the Messiah, by being baptized in his name. Thus professing their faith in Him, they would receive remission of their sins, and partake of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit. To separate from wicked people, is the only way to save ourselves from them. Those who repent of their sins, and give up themselves to Jesus Christ, must prove their sincerity by breaking off from the wicked. We must save ourselves from them; which denotes avoiding them with dread and holy fear. By God's grace three thousand persons accepted the gospel invitation. There can be no doubt that the gift of the Holy Ghost, which they all received, and from which no true believer has ever been shut out, was that Spirit of adoption, that converting, guiding, sanctifying grace, which is bestowed upon all the members of the family of our heavenly Father. Repentance and remission of sins are still preached to the chief of sinners, in the Redeemer's name; still the Holy Spirit seals the blessing on the believer's heart; still the encouraging promises are to us and our children; and still the blessings are offered to all that are afar off.

MHCC: Act 2:42-47

In these verses we have the history of the truly primitive church, of the first days of it; its state of infancy indeed, but, like that, the state of its greatest innocence. They kept close to holy ordinances, and abounded in piety and devotion; for Christianity, when admitted in the power of it, will dispose the soul to communion with God in all those ways wherein he has appointed us to meet him, and has promised to meet us. The greatness of the event raised them above the world, and the Holy Ghost filled them with such love, as made every one to be to another as to himself, and so made all things common, not by destroying property, but doing away selfishness, and causing charity. And God who moved them to it, knew that they were quickly to be driven from their possessions in Judea. The Lord, from day to day, inclined the hearts of more to embrace the gospel; not merely professors, but such as were actually brought into a state of acceptance with God, being made partakers of regenerating grace. Those whom God has designed for eternal salvation, shall be effectually brought to Christ, till the earth is filled with the knowledge of his glory.

Matthew Henry: Act 2:14-36

We have here the first-fruits of the Spirit in the sermon which Peter preached immediately, directed, not to those of other nations in a strange language (we are not told what answer he gave to those that were amazed, and said, What meaneth this? ) but to the Jews in the vulgar language, even to those that mocked; for he begins with the notice of that (Act 2:15), and addresses his discourse (Act 2:14) to the men of Judea and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; but we have reason enough to think that the other disciples continued to speak to those who understood them (and therefore flocked about them), in the languages of their respective countries, the wonderful works of God. And it was not by Peter's preaching only, but that of all, or most, of the rest of the hundred and twenty, that three thousand souls were that day converted, and added to the church; but Peter's sermon only is recorded, to be an evidence for him that he was thoroughly recovered from his fall, and thoroughly restored to the divine favour. He that had sneakingly denied Christ now as courageously confesses him. Observe,

I. His introduction or preface, wherein he craves the attention of the auditory, or demands it rather: Peter stood up (Act 2:14), to show that he was not drunk, with the eleven, who concurred with him in what he said, and probably in their turns spoke likewise to the same purport; those that were of greatest authority stood up to speak to the scoffing Jews, and to confront those who contradicted and blasphemed, but left the seventy disciples to speak to the willing proselytes from other nations, who were not so prejudiced, in their own language. Thus among Christ's ministers, some of greater gifts are called out to instruct those that oppose themselves, to take hold of sword and spear; others of meaner abilities are employed in instructing those that resign themselves, and to be vine-dressers and husband-men. Peter lifted up his voice, as one that was both well assured of and much affected with what he said, and was neither afraid nor ashamed to own it. He applied himself to the men of Judea, andres Ioudaioi - the men that were Jews; so it should be read; "and you especially that dwell at Jerusalem, who were accessory to the death of Jesus, be this known unto you, which you did not know before, and which you are concerned to know now, and hearken to my words, who would draw you to Christ, and not to the words of the scribes and Pharisees, that would draw you from him. My Master is gone, whose words you have often heard in vain, and shall hear no more as you have done, but he speaks to you by us; hearken now to our words."

II. His answer to their blasphemous calumny (Act 2:15): " These men are not drunken, as you suppose. These disciples of Christ, that now speak with other tongues, speak good sense, and know what they say, and so do those they speak to, who are led by their discourses into the knowledge of the wonderful works of God. You cannot think they are drunk, for it is but the third hour of the day, "nine of the clock in the morning; and before this time, on the sabbaths and solemn feasts, the Jews did not eat nor drink: nay, ordinarily, those that are drunk are drunk in the night, and not in the morning; those are besotted drunkards indeed who, when they awake, immediately seek it yet again, Pro 23:35.

III. His account of the miraculous effusion of the Spirit, which is designed to awaken them all to embrace the faith of Christ, and to join themselves to his church. Two things he resolves it into: - that it was the fulfilling of the scripture, and the fruit of Christ's resurrection and ascension, and consequently the proof of both.

1. That it was the accomplishment of the prophecies of the Old Testament which related to the kingdom of the Messiah, and therefore an evidence that this kingdom is come, and the other predictions of it are fulfilled. He specifies one, that of the prophet Joel, Joe 2:28. It is observable that though Peter was filled with the Holy Ghost, and spoke with tongues as the Spirit gave him utterance, yet he did not set aside the scriptures, nor think himself above them; nay, much of his discourse is quotation out of the Old Testament, to which he appeals, and with which he proves what he says. Christ's scholars never learn above their Bible; and the Spirit is given not to supersede the scriptures, but to enable us to understand and improve the scriptures. Observe,

(1.) The text itself that Peter quotes, Act 2:17-21. It refers to the last days, the times of the gospel, which are called the last days because the dispensation of God's kingdom among men, which the gospel sets up, is the last dispensation of divine grace, and we are to look for no other than the continuation of this to the end of time. Or, in the last days, that is, a great while after the ceasing of prophecy in the Old Testament church. Or, in the days immediately preceding the destruction of the Jewish nation, in the last days of that people, just before that great and notable day of the Lord spoken of, Act 2:20. "It was prophesied of and promised, and therefore you ought to expect it, and not to be surprised at it; to desire it, and bid it welcome, and not to dispute it, as not worth taking notice of."The apostle quotes the whole paragraph, for it is good to take scripture entire; now it was foretold,

[1.] That there should be a more plentiful and extensive effusion of the Spirit of grace from on high than had ever yet been. The prophets of the Old Testament had been filled with the Holy Ghost, and it was said of the people of Israel that God gave them his good Spirit to instruct them, Neh 9:20. But now the Spirit shall be poured out, not only upon the Jews, but upon all flesh, Gentiles as well as Jews, though yet Peter himself did not understand it so, as appears, Act 11:17. Or, upon all flesh, that is, upon some of all ranks and conditions of men. The Jewish doctors taught that the Spirit came only upon wise and rich men, and such as were of the seed of Israel; but God will not tie himself to their rules.

[2.] That the Spirit should be in them a Spirit of prophecy; by the Spirit they should be enabled to foretel things to come, and to preach the gospel to every creature. This power shall be given without distinction of sex - not only your sons, but your daughters shall prophesy; without distinction of age - both your young men and your old men shall see visions, and dream dreams, and in them receive divine revelations, to be communicated to the church; and without distinction of outward condition - even the servants and handmaids shall receive of the Spirit, and shall prophesy (Act 2:18); or, in general, men and women, whom God calls his servants and his handmaids. In the beginning of the age of prophecy in the Old Testament there were schools of the prophets, and, before that, the Spirit of prophecy came upon the elders of Israel that were appointed to the government; but now the Spirit shall be poured out upon persons of inferior rank, and such as were not brought up in the schools of the prophets, for the kingdom of the Messiah is to be purely spiritual. The mention of the daughters (Act 2:17) and the handmaidens (Act 2:18) would make one think that the women who were taken notice of (Act 1:14) received the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, as well as the men. Philip, the evangelist, had four daughters who did prophesy (Act 21:9), and St. Paul, finding abundance of the gifts both of tongues and prophecy in the church of Corinth, saw it needful to prohibit women's use of those gifts in public, 1Co 14:26, 1Co 14:34.

[3.] That one great thing which they should prophesy of should be the judgment that was coming upon the Jewish nation, for this was the chief thing that Christ himself had foretold (Mt. 24) at his entrance into Jerusalem (Luk 19:41); and when he was going to die (Luk 23:29); and these judgments were to be brought upon them to punish for their contempt of the gospel, and their opposition to it, though it came to them thus proved. Those that would not submit to the power of God's grace, in this wonderful effusion of his Spirit, should fall and lie under the pourings out of the vials of his wrath. Those shall break that will not bend. First, The destruction of Jerusalem, which was about forty years after Christ's death, is here called that great and notable day of the Lord, because it put a final period to the Mosaic economy; the Levitical priesthood and the ceremonial law were thereby for ever abolished and done away. The desolation itself was such as was never brought upon any place or nation, either before or since. It was the day of the Lord, for it was the day of his vengeance upon that people for crucifying Christ, and persecuting his ministers; it was the year of recompences for that controversy; yea, and for all the blood of the saints and martyrs, from the blood of righteous Abel, Mat 23:35. It was a little day of judgment; it was a notable day: in Joel it is called a terrible day, for so it was to men on earth; but here epiphanē (after the Septuagint), a glorious, illustrious day, for so it was to Christ in heaven; it was the epiphany, his appearing, so he himself spoke of it, Mat 24:30. The destruction of the Jews was the deliverance of the Christians, who were hated and persecuted by them; and therefore that day was often spoken of by the prophets of that time, for the encouragement of suffering Christians, that the Lord was at hand, the coming of the Lord drew nigh, the Judge stood before the door, Jam 5:8, Jam 5:9. Secondly, The terrible presages of that destruction are here foretold: There shall be wonders in heaven above, the sun turned into darkness and the moon into blood; and signs too in the earth beneath, blood and fire. Josephus, in his preface to his history of the wars of the Jews, speaks of the signs and prodigies that preceded them, terrible thunders, lightnings, and earthquakes; there was a fiery comet that hung over the city for a year, and a flaming sword was seen pointing down upon it; a light shone upon the temple and the altar at midnight, as if it had been noon-day. Dr. Lightfoot gives another sense of these presages: The blood of the Son of God, the fire of the Holy Ghost now appearing, the vapour of the smoke in which Christ ascended, the sun darkened, and the moon made blood, at the time of Christ's passion, were all loud warnings given to that unbelieving people to prepare for the judgments coming upon them. Or, it may be applied, and very fitly, to the previous judgments themselves by which that desolation was brought on. The blood points at the wars of the Jews with the neighbouring nations, with the Samaritans, Syrians, and Greeks, in which abundance of blood was shed, as there was also in their civil wars, and the struggles of the seditious (as they called them), which were very bloody; there was no peace to him that went out nor to him that came in. The fire and vapour of smoke, here foretold, literally came to pass in the burning of their cities, and towns, and synagogues, and temple at last. And this turning of the sun into darkness, and the moon into blood, bespeaks the dissolution of their government, civil and sacred, and the extinguishing of all their lights. Thirdly, The signal preservation of the Lord's people is here promised (Act 2:21): Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord Jesus (which is the description of a true Christian, 1Co 1:2) shall be saved, shall escape that judgment which shall be a type and earnest of everlasting salvation. In the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, there was a remnant sealed to be hid in the day of the Lord's anger; and in the destruction by the Romans not one Christian perished. Those that distinguish themselves by singular piety shall be distinguished by special preservation. And observe, the saved remnant are described by this, that they are a praying people: they call on the name of the Lord, which intimates that they are not saved by any merit or righteousness of their own, but purely by the favour of God, which must be sued out by prayer. It is the name of the Lord which they call upon that is their strong tower.

(2.) The application of this prophecy to the present event (Act 2:16): This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; it is the accomplishment of that, it is the full accomplishment of it. This is that effusion of the Spirit upon all flesh which should come, and we are to look for no other, no more than we are to look for another Messiah; for as our Messiah ever lives in heaven, reigning and interceding for his church on earth, so this Spirit of grace, the Advocate, or Comforter, that was given now, according to the promise, will, according to the same promise, continue with the church on earth to the end, and will work all its works in it and for it, and every member of it, ordinary and extraordinary, by means of the scriptures and the ministry.

2. That it was the gift of Christ, and the product and proof of his resurrection and ascension. From this gift of the Holy Ghost, he takes occasion to preach unto them Jesus; and this part of his sermon he introduces with another solemn preface (Act 2:22): " You men of Israel, hear these words. It is a mercy that you are within hearing of them, and it is your duty to give heed to them."Words concerning Christ should be acceptable words to the men of Israel. Here is,

(1.) An abstract of the history of the life of Christ, Act 2:22. He calls him Jesus of Nazareth, because by that name he was generally known, but (which was sufficient to roll away that reproach) he was a man approved of God among you, censured and condemned by men, but approved of God: God testified his approbation of his doctrine by the power he gave him to work miracles: a man marked out by God, so Dr. Hammond reads it; "signalized and made remarkable among you that now hear me. He was sent to you, set up, a glorious light in your land; you yourselves are witnesses how he became famous by miracles, wonders, and signs, works above the power of nature, out of its ordinary course, and contrary to it, which God did by him; that is, which he did by that divine power with which he was clothed, and in which God plainly went along with him; for no man could do such works unless God were with him. "See what a stress Peter lays upon Christ's miracles. [1.] The matter of fact was not to be denied: "They were done in the midst of you, in the midst of your country, your city, your solemn assemblies, as you yourselves also know. You have been eyewitnesses of his miracles; I appeal to yourselves whether you have any thing to object against them or can offer any thing to disprove them."[2.] The inference from them cannot be disputed; the reasoning is as strong as the evidence; if he did those miracles, certainly God approved him, declared him to be, what he declared himself to be, the Son of God and the Saviour of the world; for the God of truth would never set his seal to a lie.

(2.) An account of his death and sufferings which they were witness of also but a few weeks ago; and this was the greatest miracle of all, that a man approved of God should thus seem to be abandoned of him; and a man thus approved among the people, and in the midst of them, should be thus abandoned by them too. But both these mysteries are here explained (Act 2:23), and his death considered, [1.] As God's act; and in him it was an act of wonderful grace and wisdom. He delivered him to death; not only permitted him to be put to death, but gave him up, devoted him: this is explained Rom 8:32, He delivered him up for us all. And yet he was approved of God, and there was nothing in this that signified the disapproving of him; for it was done by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, in infinite wisdom, and for holy ends, which Christ himself concurred in, and in the means leading to them. Thus divine justice must be satisfied, sinners saved, God and man brought together again, and Christ himself glorified. It was not only according to the will of God, but according to the counsel of his will, that he suffered and died; according to an eternal counsel, which could not be altered. This reconciled him to the cross: Father, thy will be done; and Father, glorify thy name; let thy purpose take effect, and let the great end of it be attained. [2.] As the people's act; and in them it was an act of prodigious sin and folly; it was fighting against God to persecute one whom he approved as the darling of heaven; and fighting against their own mercies to persecute one that was the greatest blessing of this earth. Neither God's designing it from eternity, nor his bringing good out of it to eternity, would in the least excuse their sin; for it was their voluntary act and deed, from a principle morally evil, and therefore "they were wicked hands with which you have crucified and slain him."It is probable that some of those were here present who had cried, Crucify him, crucify him, or had been otherwise aiding and abetting in the murder; and Peter knew it. However, it was justly looked upon as a national act, because done both by the vote of the great council and by the voice of the great crowd. It is a rule, Refertur ad universos quod publice fit per majorem paretm - That which is done publicly by the greater part we attribute to all. He charges it particularly on them as parts of the nation on which it would be visited, the more effectually to bring them to faith and repentance, because that was the only way to distinguish themselves from the guilty and discharge themselves from the guilt.

(3.) An attestation of his resurrection, which effectually wiped away the reproach of his death (Act 2:24): Whom God raised up; the same that delivered him to death delivers him from death, and thereby gave a higher approbation of him than he had done by any other of the signs and wonders wrought by him, or by all put together. This therefore he insists most largely upon.

[1.] He describes his resurrection: God loosed the pains of death, because it was impossible that he should be holden of it; ōdinas - the sorrows of death; the word is used for travailing pains, and some think it signifies the trouble and agony of his soul, in which it was exceedingly sorrowful, even to the death; from these pains and sorrows of soul, this travail of soul, the Father loosed him when at his death he said, It is finished. Thus Dr. Godwin understands it: "Those terrors which made Heman's soul lie like the slain (Psa 88:5, Psa 88:15) had hold of Christ; but he was too strong for them, and broke through them; this was the resurrection of his soul (and it is a great thing to bring a soul out of the depths of spiritual agonies); this was not leaving his soul in hell; as that which follows, that he should not see corruption, speaks of the resurrection of his body; and both together make up the great resurrection."Dr. Lightfoot gives another sense of this: "Having dissolved the pains of death, in reference to all that believe in him, God raised up Christ, and by his resurrection broke all the power of death, and destroyed its pangs upon his own people. He has abolished death, has altered the property of it, and, because it was not possible that he should be long holden of it, it is not possible that they should be for ever holden."But most refer this to the resurrection of Christ's body. And death (says Mr. Baxter) is by privation a penal state, though not dolorous by positive evil. But Dr. Hammond shows that the Septuagint, and from them the apostle here, uses the word for cords and bands (as Psa 18:4), to which the metaphor of loosing and being held best agrees. Christ was imprisoned for our debt, was thrown into the bands of death; but, divine justice being satisfied, it was not possible he should be detained there, either by right or by force; for he had life in himself, and in his own power, and had conquered the prince of death.

[2.] He attests the truth of his resurrection (Act 2:32): God hath raised him up, whereof we all are witnesses - we apostles, and others our companions, that were intimately acquainted with him before his death, were intimately conversant with him after his resurrection, did eat and drink with him. They received power, by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them, on purpose that they might be skilful, faithful, and courageous witnesses of this thing, notwithstanding their being charged by his enemies as having stolen him away.

[3.] He showed it to be the fulfilling of the scripture, and, because the scripture had said that he must rise again before he saw corruption, therefore it was impossible that he should be holden by death and the grave; for David speaks of his being raised, so it comes in, Act 2:25. The scripture he refers to is that of David (Psa 16:8-11), which, though in part applicable to David as a saint, yet refers chiefly to Jesus Christ, of whom David was a type. Here is,

First, The text quoted at large (Act 2:25-28), for it was all fulfilled in him, and shows us, 1. The constant regard that our Lord Jesus had to his Father in his whole undertaking: I foresaw the Lord before me continually. He set before him his Father's glory as his end in all- for he saw that his sufferings would redound abundantly to the honour of God, and would issue in his own joy; these were set before him, and these he had an eye to, in all he did and suffered; and with the prospect of these he was borne up and carried on, Joh 13:31, Joh 13:32; Joh 17:4, Joh 17:5. 2. The assurance he had of his Father's presence and power going along with him: " He is on my right hand, the hand of action, strengthening, guiding, and upholding that, that I should not be moved, nor driven off from my undertaking, notwithstanding the hardships I must undergo."This was an article of the covenant of redemption (Psa 89:21), With him my hand shall be established, my arm also shall strengthen him; and therefore he is confident the work shall not miscarry in his hand. If God be at our right hand we shall not be moved. 3. The cheerfulness with which our Lord Jesus went on in his work, notwithstanding the sorrows he was to pass through: "Being satisfied that I shall not be moved, but the good pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in my hand, therefore doth my heart rejoice, and my tongue is glad, and the thought of my sorrow is as nothing to me."Note, It was a constant pleasure to our Lord Jesus to look to the end of his work, and to be sure that the issue would be glorious; so well pleased is he with his undertaking that it does his heart good to think how the issue would answer the design. He rejoiced in spirit, Luk 10:21. My tongue was glad. In the psalm it is, My glory rejoiceth; which intimates that our tongue is our glory, the faculty of speaking is an honour to us, and never more so than when it is employed in praising God. Christ's tongue was glad, for when he was just entering upon his sufferings, in the close of his last supper, he sang a hymn. 4. The pleasing prospect he had of the happy issue of his death and sufferings; it was this that carried him, not only with courage, but with cheerfulness, through them; he was putting off the body, but my flesh shall rest; the grave shall be to the body, while it lies there, a bed of repose, and hope shall give it a sweet repose; it shall rest in hope, hoti , that thou wilt no leave my soul in hell; what follows is the matter of his hope, or assurance rather, (1.) That the soul shall not continue in a state of separation from the body; for, besides that this is some uneasiness to a human soul made for its body, it would be the continuance of death's triumph over him who was in truth a conqueror over death: " Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell "(in hades, in the invisible state, so hades properly signifies); "but, though thou suffer it for a time to remove thither, and to remain there, yet thou wilt remand it; thou wilt not leave it there, as thou dost the souls of other men."(2.) That the body shall lie but a little while in the grave: Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption; the body shall not continue dead so long as to begin to putrefy or become noisome; and therefore it must return to life on or before the third day after its death. Christ was God's Holy One, sanctified and set apart to his service in the work of redemption; he must die, for he must be consecrated by his own blood; but he must not see corruption, for his death was to be unto God of a sweet smelling savour. This was typified by the law concerning the sacrifice, that no part of the flesh of the sacrifice which was to be eaten should be kept till the third day, for fear it should see corruption and begin to putrefy, Lev 7:15-18. (3.) That his death and sufferings should be, not to him only, but to all his, an inlet to a blessed immortality: " Thou has made known to me the ways of life, and by me made them known to the world, and laid them open."When the Father gave to the Son to have life in himself, a power to lay down his life and to take it again, then he showed him the way of life, both to and fro; the gates of death were open to him and the doors of the shadow of death (Job 38:17), to pass and repass through them, as his occasion led him, for man's redemption. (4.) That all his sorrows and sufferings should end in perfect and perpetual felicity: Thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. The reward set before him was joy, a fulness of joy, and that in God's countenance, in the countenance he gave to his undertaking, and to all those, for his sake, that should believe in him. The smiles with which the Father received him, when, at his ascension, he was brought to the Ancient of days, filled him with joy unspeakable, and that is the joy of our Lord, into which all his shall enter, and in which they shall be for ever happy.

Secondly, The comment upon this text, especially so much of it as relates to the resurrection of Christ. He addresses himself to them with a title of respect, Men and brethren, Act 2:29. "You are men, and therefore should be ruled by reason; you are brethren, and therefore should take kindly what is said to you by one who, being nearly related to you, is heartily concerned for you, and wishes you well. Now, give me leave freely to speak to you concerning the patriarch David, and let it be no offence to you if I tell you that David cannot be understood here as speaking of himself, but of the Christ to come."David is here called a patriarch, because he was the father of the royal family, and a man of great note and eminency in his generation, and whose name and memory were justly very precious. Now when we read that psalm of his, we must consider, 1. That he could not say that of himself, for he died, and was buried, and his sepulchre remained in Jerusalem till now, when Peter spoke this, and his bones and ashes in it. Nobody ever pretended that he had risen, and therefore he could never say of himself that he should not see corruption; for it was plain he did see corruption. St. Paul urges this, Act 13:35-37. Though he was a man after God's own heart, yet he went the way of all the earth, as he saith himself (1Ki 2:2), both in death and burial. 2. Therefore certainly he spoke it as a prophet, with an eye to the Messiah, whose sufferings the prophets testified beforehand, and with them the glory that should follow; so did David in that psalm, as Peter here plainly shows. (1.) David knew that the Messiah should descend from his loins (Act 2:30), that God had sworn to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. He promised him a Son, the throne of whose kingdom should be established for ever, 2Sa 7:12. And it is said (Psa 132:11), God swore it in truth unto David. When our Lord Jesus was born, it was promised that the Lord God would give him the throne of his father David, Luk 1:32. And all Israel knew that the Messiah was to be the Son of David, that is, that, according to the flesh, he should be so by his human nature; for otherwise, according to the spirit, and by his divine nature, he was to be David's Lord, not his son. God having sworn to David that the Messiah, promised to his fathers, should be his son and successor, the fruit of his loins, and heir to his throne, he kept this in view, in penning his psalms. (2.) Christ being the fruit of his loins, and consequently in his loins when he penned that psalm (as Levi is said to be in Abraham's loins when he paid tithes to Melchizedek ), if what he says, as in his own person, be not applicable to himself (as it is plain that it is not), we must conclude it points to that son of his that was then in his loins, in whom his family and kingdom were to have their perfection and perpetuity; and therefore, when he says that his soul should not be left in its separate state, nor his flesh see corruption, without doubt he must be understood to speak of the resurrection of Christ, Act 2:31. And as Christ died, so he rose again, according to the scriptures; and that he did so we are witnesses. (3.) Here is a glance at his ascension too. As David did not rise from the dead, so neither did he ascend into the heavens, bodily, as Christ did, Act 2:34. And further, to prove that when he spoke of the resurrection he meant it of Christ, he observes that when in another psalm he speaks of the next step of his exaltation he plainly shows that he spoke of another person, and such another as was his Lord (Psa 110:1): " The Lord said unto my Lord, when he had raised him from the dead, Sit thou at my right hand, in the highest dignity and dominion there; be thou entrusted with the administration of the kingdom both of providence and grace; sit there as king, until I make thy foes either thy friends or thy footstool, "Act 2:35. Christ rose from the grave to rise higher, and therefore it must be of his resurrection that David spoke, and not his own, in the Psa 16:1; for there was no occasion for him to rise out of his grave who was not to ascend to heaven.

(4.) The application of this discourse concerning the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

[1.] This explains the meaning of the present wonderful effusion of the Spirit in those extraordinary gifts. Some of the people had asked (Act 2:12), What meaneth this? I will tell you the meaning of it, says Peter. This Jesus being exalted to the right hand of God, so some read it, to sit there; exalted by the right hand of God, so we read it, by his power and authority - it comes all to one; and having received of the Father, to whom he has ascended, the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath given what he received (Psa 68:18), and hath shed forth this which you now see and hear; for the Holy Ghost was to be given when Jesus was glorified, and not before, Joh 7:39. You see and hear us speak with tongues that we never learned; probably there was an observable change in the air of their countenances, which they saw, as well as heard the change of their voice and language; now this is from the Holy Ghost, whose coming is an evidence that Jesus is exalted, and he has received this gift from the Father, to confer it upon the church, which plainly bespeaks him to be the Mediator, or middle person between God and the church. The gift of the Holy Ghost was, First, A performance of divine promises already made; here it is called the promise of the Holy Ghost; many exceedingly great and precious promises the divine power has given us, but this is the promise, by way of eminency, as that of the Messiah had been, and this is the promise that includes all the rest; hence God's giving the Holy Spirit to those that ask him (Luk 11:13) is his giving them all good things, Mat 7:11. Christ received the promise of the Holy Ghost, that is, the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, and has given it to us; for all the promises are yea and amen in him. Secondly, It was a pledge of all divine favours further intended; what you now see and hear is but an earnest of greater things.

[2.] This proves what you are all bound to believe, that Christ Jesus is the true Messiah and Saviour of the world; this he closes his sermon with, as the conclusion of the whole matter, the quod erat demonstrandum - the truth to be demonstrated (Act 2:36): Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that this truth has now received its full confirmation, and we our full commission to publish it, That God has made that same Jesus whom you have crucified both Lord and Christ. They were charged to tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ till after his resurrection (Mat 16:20; Mat 17:9); but now it must be proclaimed on the housetops, to all the house of Israel; he that hath ears to hear, let him hear it. It is not proposed as probable, but deposed as certain: Let them know it assuredly, and know that it is their duty to receive it as a faithful saying, First, That God has glorified him whom they have crucified. This aggravates their wickedness, that they crucified one whom God designed to glorify, and put him to death as a deceiver who had given such pregnant proofs of his divine mission; and it magnifies the wisdom and power of God that though they crucified him, and thought thereby to have put him under an indelible mark of infamy, yet God had glorified him, and the indignities they had done him served as a foil to his lustre. Secondly, That he has glorified him to such a degree as to make him both Lord and Christ: these signify the same; he is Lord of all, and he is not a usurper, but is Christ, anointed to be so. He is one Lord to the Gentiles, who had had lords many; and to the Jews he is Messiah, which includes all his offices. He is the king Messiah, as the Chaldee paraphrast calls him; or, as the angel to Daniel, Messiah the prince, Dan 9:25. This is the great truth of the gospel which we are to believe, that that same Jesus, the very same that was crucified at Jerusalem, is he to whom we owe allegiance, and from whom we are to expect protection, as Lord and Christ.

Matthew Henry: Act 2:37-41

We have seen the wonderful effect of the pouring out of the Spirit, in its influence upon the preachers of the gospel. Peter, in all his life, never spoke at the rate that he had done now, with such fulness, perspicuity, and power. We are now to see another blessed fruit of the pouring out of the Spirit in its influence upon the hearers of the gospel. From the first delivery of that divine message, it appeared that there was a divine power going along with it, and it was mighty, through God, to do wonders: thousands were immediately brought by it to the obedience of faith; it was the rod of God's strength sent out of Zion, Psa 110:2, Psa 110:3. We have here the first-fruits of that vast harvest of souls which by it were gathered in to Jesus Christ. Come and see, in these verses, the exalted Redeemer riding forth, in these chariots of salvation, conquering and to conquer, Rev 6:2.

In these verses we find the word of God the means of beginning and carrying on a good work of grace in the hearts of many, the Spirit of the Lord working by it. Let us see the method of it.

I. They were startled, and convinced, and put upon a serious enquiry, Act 2:37. When they heard, or having heard, having patiently heard Peter out, and not given him the interruption they had been used to give to Christ in his discourses (this was one good point gained, that they were become attentive to the word), they were pricked to the heart, or in the heart, and, under a deep concern and perplexity, applied themselves to the preachers with this question, What shall we do? It was very strange that such impressions should be made upon such hard hearts all of a sudden. They were Jews, bred up in the opinion of the sufficiency of their religion to save them, had lately seen this Jesus crucified in weakness and disgrace, and were told by their rulers that he was a deceiver. Peter had charged them with having a hand, a wicked hand, in his death, which was likely to have exasperated them against him; yet, when they heard this plain scriptural sermon, they were much affected with it.

1. It put them in pain: They were pricked in their hearts. We read of those that were cut to the heart with indignation at the preacher (Act 7:54), but these were pricked to the heart with indignation at themselves for having been accessory to the death of Christ. Peter, charging it upon them, awakened their consciences, touched them to the quick, and the reflection they now made upon it was as a sword in their bones, it pierced them as they had pierced Christ. Note, Sinners, when their eyes are opened, cannot but be pricked to the heart for sin, cannot but experience an inward uneasiness; this is having the heart rent (Joe 2:13), a broken and contrite heart, Psa 51:17. Those that are truly sorry for their sins, and ashamed of them, and afraid of the consequences of them, are pricked to the heart. A prick in the heart is mortal, and under those commotions (says Paul) I died, Rom 7:9. "All my good opinion of myself and confidence in myself failed me."

2. It put them upon enquiry. Our of the abundance of the heart, thus pricked, the mouth spoke. Observe,

(1.) To whom they thus addressed themselves: To Peter and to the rest of the apostles, some to one and some to another; to them they opened their case; by them they had been convinced, and therefore by them they expect to be counselled and comforted. They do not appeal from them to the scribes and Pharisees, to justify them against the apostles' charge, but apply to them, as owning the charge, and referring the case to them. They call them men and brethren, as Peter had called them (Act 2:29): it is a style of friendship and love, rather than a title of honour: "You are men, look upon us with humanity; you are brethren, look upon us with brotherly love."Note, Ministers are spiritual physicians; they should be advised with by those whose consciences are wounded; and it is good for people to be free and familiar with those ministers, as men and their brethren, who deal for their souls as for their own.

(2.) What the address is: What shall we do? [1.] They speak as men at a stand, that did not know what to do; in a perfect surprise: " Is that Jesus whom we have crucified both Lord and Christ? Then what will become of us who crucified him? We are all undone!"Note, No way of being happy but by seeing ourselves miserable. When we find ourselves in danger of being lost for ever, there is hope of our being made for ever, and not till then. [2.] They speak as men at a point, that were resolved to do any thing they should be directed to immediately; they are not for taking time to consider, nor for adjourning the prosecution of their convictions to a more convenient season, but desire now to be told what they must do to escape the misery they were liable to. Note, Those that are convinced of sin would gladly know the way to peace and pardon, Act 9:6; Act 16:30.

II. Peter and the other apostles direct them in short what they must do, and what in so doing they might expect, Act 2:38, Act 2:39. Sinners convinced must be encouraged; and that which is broken must be bound up (Eze 34:16); they must be told that though their case is sad it is not desperate, there is hope for them.

1. He here shows them the course they must take. (1.) Repent; this is a plank after shipwreck. "Let the sense of this horrid guilt which you have brought upon yourselves by putting Christ to death awaken you to a penitent reflection upon all your other sins (as the demand of some one great debt brings to light all the debts of a poor bankrupt) and to bitter remorse and sorrow for them"This was the same duty that John the Baptist and Christ had preached, and now that the Spirit is poured out is it still insisted on: " Repent, repent; change your mind, change your way; admit an after-thought."(2.) Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ; that is, "firmly believe the doctrine of Christ, and submit to his grace and government; and make an open solemn profession of this, and come under an engagement to abide by it, by submitting to the ordinance of baptism; be proselyted to Christ and to his holy religion, and renounce your infidelity."They must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. They did believe in the Father and the Holy Ghost speaking by the prophets; but they must also believe in the name of Jesus, that he is the Christ, the Messias promised to the fathers. "Take Jesus for your king, and by baptism swear allegiance to him; take him for your prophet, and hear him; take him for your priest, to make atonement for you,"which seems peculiarly intended here; for they must be baptized in his name for the remission of sins upon the score of his righteousness. (3.) This is pressed upon each particular person: Every one of you. "Even those of you that have been the greatest sinners, if they repent and believe, are welcome to be baptized; and those who think they have been the greatest saints have yet need to repent, and believe, and be baptized. There is grace enough in Christ for every one of you, be you ever so many, and grace suited to the case of every one. Israel of old were baptized unto Moses in the camp, the whole body of the Israelites together, when they passed through the cloud and the sea (1Co 10:1, 1Co 10:2), for the covenant of peculiarity was national; but now every one of you distinctly must be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and transact for himself in this great affair."See Col 1:28.

2. He gives them encouragement to take this course: - (1.) "It shall be for the remission of sins. Repent of your sin, and it shall not be your ruin; be baptized into the faith of Christ, and in truth you shall be justified, which you could never be by the law of Moses. Aim at this, and depend upon Christ for it, and this you shall have. As the cup in the Lord's supper is the New Testament in the blood of Christ for the remission of sins, so baptism is in the name of Christ for the remission of sins. Be washed, and you shall be washed."(2.) "You shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as well as we; for it is designed for a general blessing: some of you shall receive these external gifts, and each of you, if you be sincere in your faith and repentance, shall receive his internal graces and comforts, shall be sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. "Note, All that receive the remission of sins receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. All that are justified are sanctified. (3.) "Your children shall still have, as they have had, an interest in the covenant, and a title to the external seal of it. Come over to Christ, to receive those inestimable benefits; for the promise of the remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, is to you and to your children, "Act 2:39. It was very express (Isa 44:3): I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed. And (Isa 59:21), My Spirit and my word shall not depart from thy seed, and thy seed's seed. When God took Abraham into covenant, he said, I will be a God to thee, and to thy seed (Gen 17:7); and, accordingly, every Israelite had his son circumcised at eight days old. Now it is proper for an Israelite, when he is by baptism to come into a new dispensation of this covenant, to ask, "What must be done with my children? Must they be thrown out, or taken in with me?""Taken in"(says Peter) "by all means; for the promise, that great promise of God's being to you a God, is as much to you and to your children now as ever it was."(4.) "Though the promise is still extended to your children as it has been, yet it is not, as it has been, confined to you and them, but the benefit of it is designed for all that are afar off; "we may add, and their children, for the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles, through Jesus Christ, Gal 3:14. The promise had long pertained to the Israelites (Rom 9:4); but now it is sent to those that are afar off, the remotest nations of the Gentiles, and every one of them too, all that are afar off. To this general the following limitation must refer, even as many of them, as many particular persons in each nation, as the Lord our God shall call effectually into the fellowship of Jesus Christ. Note, God can make his call to reach those that are ever so far off, and none come but those whom he calls.

III. These directions are followed with a needful caution (Act 2:40): With many other words, to the same purport, did he testify gospel truths, and exhort to gospel duties; now that the word began to work he followed it; he had said much in a little (Act 2:38, Act 2:39), and that which, one would think, included all, and yet he had more to say. When we have heard those words which have done our souls good, we cannot but wish to hear more, to hear many more such words. Among other things he said (and it should seem inculcated it), Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Be you free from them. The unbelieving Jews were an untoward generation, perverse and obstinate; they walked contrary to God and man (1Th 2:15), wedded to sin and marked for ruin. Now as to them, 1. "Give diligence to save yourselves from their ruin, that you may not be involved in that, and may escape all those things "(as the Christians did): " Repent, and be baptized; and then you shall not be sharers in destruction with those with whom you have been sharers in sin." O gather not my soul with sinners. 2. "In order to this continue not with them in their sin, persist not with them in infidelity. Save yourselves, that is, separate yourselves, distinguish yourselves, from this untoward generation. Be not rebellious like this rebellious house; partake not with them in their sins, that you share not with them in their plagues."Note, To separate ourselves from wicked people is the only way to save ourselves from them; though we hereby expose ourselves to their rage and enmity, we really save ourselves from them; for, if we consider whither they are hastening, we shall see it is better to have the trouble of swimming against their stream than the danger of being carried down their stream. Those that repent of their sins, and give up themselves to Jesus Christ, must evidence their sincerity by breaking off all intimate society with wicked people. Depart from me, ye evil doers, is the language of one that determines to keep the commandments of his God, Psa 119:115. We must save ourselves from them, which denotes avoiding them with dread and holy fear, as we would save ourselves from an enemy that seeks to destroy us, or from a house infected with the plague.

IV. Here is the happy success and issue of this, Act 2:41. The Spirit wrought with the word, and wrought wonders by it. These same persons that had many of them been eye-witnesses of the death of Christ, and the prodigies that attended it, and were not wrought upon by them, were yet wrought upon by the preaching of the word, for it is this that is the power of God unto salvation. 1. They received the word; and then only the word does us good, when we do receive it, embrace it, and bid it welcome. They admitted the conviction of it, and accepted the offers of it. 2. They gladly received it. Herod heard the word gladly, but these gladly received it, were not only glad that they had it to receive, but glad that by the grace of God they were enabled to receive it, though it would be a humbling changing word to them, and would expose them to the enmity of their countrymen. 3. They were baptized; believing with the heart, they made confession with the mouth, and enrolled themselves among the disciples of Christ by that sacred rite and ceremony which he had instituted. And though Peter had said, "Be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus "(because the doctrine of Christ was the present truth), yet we have reason to think that, in baptizing them, the whole form Christ prescribed was used, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Note, Those that receive the Christian covenant ought to receive the Christian baptism. 4. Hereby there were added to the disciples to the number of about three thousand souls that same day. All those that had received the Holy Ghost had their tongues at work to preach, and their hands at work to baptize; for it was time to be busy, when such a harvest was to be gathered in. The conversion of these three thousand with these words was a greater work than the feeding of four or five thousand with a few loaves. Now Israel began to multiply after the death of our Joseph. They are said to be three thousand souls (which word is generally used for persons when women and children are included with men, as Gen 14:21, margin, Give me the souls; Gen 46:27, seventy souls ), which intimates that those that were here baptized were not so many men, but so many heads of families as, with their children and servants baptized, might make up three thousand souls. These were added to them. Note, Those who are joined to Christ are added to the disciples of Christ, and join with them. When we take God for our God, we must take his people to be our people.

Matthew Henry: Act 2:42-47

We often speak of the primitive church, and appeal to it, and to the history of it; in these verses we have the history of the truly primitive church, of the first days of it, its state of infancy indeed, but, like that, the state of its greatest innocence.

I. They kept close to holy ordinances, and abounded in all instances of piety and devotion, for Christianity, admitted in the power of it, will dispose the soul to communion with God in all those ways wherein he has appointed us to meet him and promised to meet us.

1. They were diligent and constant inn their attendance upon the preaching of the word. They continued in the apostles' doctrine, and never disowned nor deserted it; or, as it may be read, they continued constant to the apostles' teaching or instruction; by baptism they were discipled to be taught, and they were willing to be taught. Note, Those who have given up their names to Christ must make conscience of hearing his word; for thereby we give honour to him, and build up ourselves in our most holy faith.

2. They kept up the communion of saints. They continued in fellowship (Act 2:42), and continued daily with one accord in the temple, Act 2:46. They not only had a mutual affection to each other, but a great deal of mutual conversation with each other; they were much together. When they withdrew from the untoward generation, they did not turn hermits, but were very intimate with one another, and took all occasions to meet; wherever you saw one disciple, you would see more, like birds of a feather. See how these Christians love one another. They were concerned for one another, sympathized with one another, and heartily espoused one another's interests. They had fellowship with one another in religious worship. They met in the temple: there was their rendezvous; for joint-fellowship with God is the best fellowship we can have with one another, 1Jo 1:3. Observe, (1.) They were daily in the temple, not only on the days of the sabbaths and solemn feasts, but on other days, every day. Worshipping God is to be our daily work, and, where there is opportunity, the oftener it is done publicly the better. God loves the gates of Zion, and so must we. (2.) They were with one accord; not only no discord nor strife, but a great deal of holy love among them; and they heartily joined in their public services. Though they met with the Jews in the courts of the temple, yet the Christians kept together by themselves, and were unanimous in their separate devotions.

3. They frequently joined in the ordinance of the Lord's supper. They continued in the breaking of bread, in celebrating that memorial of their Master's death, as those that were not ashamed to own their relation to, and their dependence upon, Christ and him crucified. They could not forget the death of Christ, yet they kept up this memorial of it, and made it their constant practice, because it was an institution of Christ, to be transmitted to the succeeding ages of the church. They broke bread from house to house; kat' oikon - house by house; they did not think fit to celebrate the eucharist in the temple, for that was peculiar to the Christian institutes, and therefore they administered that ordinance in private houses, choosing such houses of the converted Christians as were convenient, to which the neighbours resorted; and they went from one to another of these little synagogues or domestic chapels, houses that had churches in them, and there celebrated the eucharist with those that usually met there to worship God.

4. They continued in prayers. After the Spirit was poured out, as well as before, while they were waiting for him, they continued instant in prayer; for prayer will never be superseded till it comes to be swallowed up in everlasting praise. Breaking of bread comes in between the work and prayer, for it has reference to both, and is a help to both. The Lord's supper is a sermon to the eye, and a confirmation of God's word to us; and it is an encouragement to our prayers, and a solemn expression of the ascent of our souls to God.

5. They abounded in thanksgiving; were continually praising God, Act 2:47. This should have a part in every prayer, and not be crowded into a corner. Those that have received the gift of the Holy Ghost will be much in praise.

II. They were loving one to another, and very kind; their charity was as eminent as their piety, and their joining together in holy ordinances knit their hearts to each other, and very much endeared them to one another.

1. They had frequent meetings for Christian converse (Act 2:44): All that believed were together; not all those thousands in one place (this was impracticable); but, as Dr. Lightfoot explains it, they kept together in several companies or congregations, according as their languages, nations, or other associations, brought them and kept them together. And thus joining together, because it was apart from those that believed not, and because it was in the same profession and practice of the duties of religion, they are said to be together, epi to auto . They associated together, and so both expressed and increased their mutual love.

2. They had all things common; perhaps they had common tables (as the Spartans of old), for familiarity, temperance and freedom of conversation; they ate together, that those who had much might have the less, and so be kept from the temptations of abundance; and they who had little might have the more, and so be kept from the temptations of want and poverty. Or, There was such a concern for one another, and such a readiness to help one another as there was occasion, that it might be said, They had all things common, according to the law of friendship; one wanted not what another had; for he might have it for the asking.

3. They were very cheerful, and very generous in the use of what they had. Besides the religion that was in their sacred feasts (their breaking bread from house to house ) a great deal of it appeared in their common meals; they did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart. They brought the comforts of God's table along with them to their own, which had two good effects upon them: - (1.) It made them very pleasant, and enlarged their hearts with holy joy; they did eat their bread with joy, and drank their wine with a merry heart, as knowing that God now accepted their works. None have such cause to be cheerful as good Christians have; it is a pity but that they should always have hearts to be so. (2.) It made them very liberal to their poor brethren, and enlarged their hearts in charity. They did eat their meat with singleness of heart, en aphelotēti kardias - with liberality of heart; so some: they did not eat their morsels alone, but bade the poor welcome to their table, not grudgingly, but with all the hearty freedom imaginable. Note, It becomes Christians to be open-hearted and open-handed, and in every good work to sow plentifully, as those on whom God hath sown plentifully, and who hope to reap so.

4. They raised a fund for charity (Act 2:45): They sold their possessions and goods; some sold their lands and houses, others their stocks and the furniture of their houses, and parted the money to their brethren, as every man had need. This was to destroy, not property (as Mr. Baxter says), but selfishness. Herein, probably, they had an eye to the command which Christ gave to the rich man, as a test of his sincerity, Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor. Not that this was intended for an example to be a constant binding rule, as if all Christians in all places and ages were bound to sell their estates, and give away the money in charity. For St. Paul's epistles, after this, often speak of the distinction of rich and poor, and Christ hath said that the poor we always have with us, and shall have, and the rich must be always doing them good out of the rents, issues, and profits, of their estates, which they disable themselves to do, if they sell them, and give all away at once. But here the case was extraordinary (1.) They were under no obligation of a divine command to do this, as appears by what Peter said to Ananias (Act 5:4): Was it not in thine own power? But it was a very commendable instance of their raisedness above the world, their contempt of it, their assurance of another world, their love to their brethren, their compassion to the poor, and their great zeal for the encouraging of Christianity, and the nursing of it in its infancy. The apostles left all to follow Christ, and were to give themselves wholly to the word and prayer, and something must be done for their maintenance; so that this extraordinary liberality was like that of Israel in the wilderness towards the building of the tabernacle, which needed to be restrained, Exo 36:5, Exo 36:6. Our rule is, to give according as God has blessed us; yet, in such an extraordinary case as this, those are to be praised who give beyond their power, 2Co 8:3. (2.) They were Jews that did this, and those who believed Christ must believe that the Jewish nation would shortly be destroyed, and an end put to the possession of estates and goods in it, and, in the belief of this, they sold them for the present service of Christ and his church.

III. God owned them, and gave them signal tokens of his presence with them (Act 2:43): Many wonders and signs were done by the apostles of divers sorts, which confirmed their doctrine, and incontestably proved that it was from God. Those that could work miracles could have maintained themselves and the poor that were among them miraculously, as Christ fed thousands with a little food; but it was as much for the glory of God that it should be done by a miracle of grace (inclining people to sell their estates, to do it) as if it had been done by a miracle in nature.

But the Lord's giving them power to work miracles was not all he did for them; he added to the church daily. The word in their mouths did wonders, and God blessed their endeavours for the increase of the number of believers. Note, It is God's work to add souls to the church; and it is a great comfort both to ministers and Christians to see it.

IV. The people were influenced by it; those that were without, the standers by, that were spectators. 1. They feared them, and had a veneration for them (Act 2:43): Fear came upon every soul, that is, upon very many who saw the wonders and signs done by the apostles, and were afraid lest their not being respected as they should be would bring desolation upon their nation. The common people stood in awe of them, as Herod feared John. Though they had nothing of external pomp to command external respect, as the scribes' long robes gained them the greetings in the market-places, yet they had abundance of spiritual gifts that were truly honourable, which possessed men with an inward reverence for them. Fear came upon every soul; the souls of people were strangely influenced by their awful preaching and living. 2. They favoured them. Though we have reason to think there were those that despised them and hated them (we are sure the Pharisees and chief priests did), yet far the greater part of the common people had a kindness for them - they had favour with all the people. Christ was so violently run upon and run down by a packed mob, which cried, Crucify him, crucify him, that one would think his doctrine and followers were never likely to have an interest in the common people any more. And yet here we find them in favour with them all, by which it appears that their prosecuting Christ was a sort of force put upon them by the artifices of the priests; now they returned to their wits, to their right mind. Note, Undissembled piety and charity will command respect; and cheerfulness in serving God will recommend religion to those that are without. Some read it, They had charity to all the people - charin echontes pros holon ton laon ; they did not confine their charity to those of their own community, but it was catholic and extensive; and this recommended them very much. 3. They fell over to them. Some or other were daily coming in, though not so many as the first day; and they were such as should be saved. Note, Those that God has designed for eternal salvation shall one time or other be effectually brought to Christ: and those that are brought to Christ are added to the church in a holy covenant by baptism, and in holy communion by other ordinances.

Barclay: Act 2:22-36

Here is a passage full of the essence of the thought of the early preachers.

(i) It insists that the Cross was no accident. It belonged to the eternal plan of God (Act 2:23). Over and over again Acts states this same thing (compare Act 3:18; Act 4:28; Act 13:29). The thought of Acts safeguards us from two serious errors in our thinking about the death of Jesus. (a) The Cross is not a kind of emergency measure flung out by God when everything else had failed. It is part of God's very life. (b) We must never think that anything Jesus did changed the attitude of God to men. It was by God Jesus was sent. We may put it this way--the Cross was a window in time allowing us to see the suffering love which is eternally in the heart of God.

(ii) Acts insists that this in no way lessens the crime of those who crucified Jesus. Every mention of the crucifixion in Acts is instinct with a feeling of shuddering horror at the crime it was (compare Act 2:23; Act 3:13; Act 4:10; Act 5:30). Apart from anything else, the crucifixion shows supremely how horrifyingly sin can behave.

(iii) Acts is out to prove that the sufferings and death of Christ were the fulfillment of prophecy. The earliest preachers had to do that. To the Jew the idea of a crucified Messiah was incredible. Their law said, "A hanged man is accursed by God" (Deu 21:23). To the orthodox Jew the Cross made it completely impossible that Jesus could be the Messiah. The early preachers answered, "If you would only read your scriptures rightly you would see that all was foretold."

(iv) Acts stresses the resurrection as the final proof that Jesus was indeed God's Chosen One. Acts has been called The Gospel of the Resurrection. To the early Church the resurrection was all-important. We must remember this--without the resurrection there would have been no Christian Church at all. When the disciples preached the centrality of the resurrection they were arguing from experience. After the Cross they were bewildered, broken men, with their dream gone and their lives shattered. It was the resurrection which changed all that and turned them from cowards into heroes. It is one of the tragedies of the Church that so often the preaching of the resurrection is confined to Easter time. Every Sunday is the Lord's Day and every Lord's Day should be kept as resurrection day. In the Eastern Church on Easter day, when two people meet, one says, "The Lord is risen"; and the other answers, "He is risen indeed!" A Christian should never forget that he lives and walks with a Risen Lord.

Barclay: Act 2:37-41

(i) This passage shows with crystal clarity the effect of the Cross. When men realised just what they had done in crucifying Jesus their hearts were broken. "I," said Jesus, "when I am lifted up from the earth will draw all men to myself" (Joh 12:32). Every man has had a hand in that crime. Once a missionary told the story of Jesus in an Indian village. Afterwards he showed the life of Christ in lantern slides thrown against the white-washed wall of a house. When the Cross appeared on the wall, one man rose from the audience and ran forward. "Come down from that Cross, Son of God," he cried. "I, not you, should be hanging there." The Cross, when we understand what happened there, must pierce the heart.

(ii) That experience demands a reaction from men. "Repent," said Peter, "first and foremost." What does repentance mean? The word originally meant an afterthought. Often a second thought shows that the first thought was wrong; and so the word came to mean a Change of mind. But, if a man is honest, a change of mind demands a change of action. Repentance must involve both change of mind and change of action. A man may change his mind and come to see that his actions were wrong but be so much in love with his old ways that he will not change them. A man may change his ways but his mind remains the same, changing only because of fear or prudence. True repentance involves a change of mind and a change of action.

(iii) When repentance comes something happens to the past. There is God's forgiveness for what lies behind. Let us be quite clear that the consequences of sins are not wiped out. Not even God can do that. When we sin we may well do something to ourselves and to others which cannot be undone. Let us look at it this way. When we were young and had done something bad there was an invisible barrier between us and our mother. But when we went and said we were sorry, the old relationship was restored and we were right with her again. Forgiveness does not abolish the consequences of what we have done but it puts us right with God.

(iv) When repentance comes something happens for the future. We receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and in that power we can win battles we never thought to win and resist things which by ourselves we would have been powerless to resist.

Barclay: Act 2:42-47

In this passage we have a kind of lightning summary of the characteristics of the early Church.

(i) It was a learning Church; it persisted in listening to the apostles as they taught. One of the great perils of the Church is to look back instead of forward. Because the riches of Christ are inexhaustible we should ever be going forward. We should count It a wasted day when we do not learn something new and when we have not penetrated more deeply into the wisdom and the grace of God.

(ii) It was a Church of fellowship; it had what someone has called the great quality of togetherness. Nelson explained one of his victories by saying, "I had the happiness to command a band of brothers." The Church is a real Church only when it is a band of brothers.

(iii) It was a praying Church--these early Christians knew that they could not meet life in their own strength and that they did not need to. They always went in to God before they went out to the world; they were able to meet the problems of life because they had first met him.

(iv) It was a reverent Church--in Act 2:43the word which the King James Version correctly translates fear has the idea of awe in it. It was said of a great Greek that he moved through this world as if it were a temple. The Christian lives in reverence because he knows that the whole earth is the temple of the living God.

(v) It was a Church where things happened--signs and wonders were there (Act 2:43). If we expect great things from God and attempt great things for God things happen. More things would happen if we believed that God and we together could make them happen.

(vi) It was a sharing Church (Act 2:44-45); these early Christians had an intense feeling of responsibility for each other. It was said of William Morris that he never saw a drunken man but he had a feeling of personal responsibility for him. A real Christian cannot bear to have too much when others have too little.

(vii) It was a worshipping Church (Act 2:46); they never forgot to visit God's house. We must remember that "God knows nothing of solitary religion." Things can happen when we come together. God's Spirit moves upon his worshipping people.

(viii) It was a happy Church (Act 2:46); gladness was there. A gloomy Christian is a contradiction in terms.

(ix) It was a Church whose people others could not help liking. There are two Greek words for good. Agathos (18) simply describes a thing as good. Kalos (2570) means that a thing is not only good but looks good; it has a winsome attractiveness about it. Real Christianity is a lovely thing. There are so many people who are good but with their goodness possess a streak of unlovely hardness. Struthers of Greenock used to say that it would help the Church more than anything else if Christians ever and again would do a bonnie thing. In the early Church there was a winsomeness in God's people.

Constable: Act 2:1-41

5. The birth of the church 2:1-41

The Holy Spirit's descent on the day of Pentecost inaugurated a new dispensation in God's administration of the human race.⁷⁸ Luke featured the record of the events of this day to explain the changes in God's dealings with humankind that followed in the early church and to the present day. This was the birthday of the church.⁷⁹

"The plot of a work can often be illuminated by considering the major conflict or conflicts within it. Although Jesus' witnesses face other conflicts, the central conflict of the plot, repeatedly emphasized and still present in the last major scene of Acts, is a conflict within Judaism provoked by Jewish Christian preachers (including Paul). Acts 2:1-8:3 traces the development of this conflict in Jerusalem."⁸⁰

Constable: Act 2:14-41

Peter's Pentecost sermon 2:14-41

"The miraculous is not self-authenticating, nor does it inevitably and uniformly convince. There must also be the preparation of the heart and the proclamation of the message if miracles are to accomplish their full purpose. This was true even for the miracle of the Spirit's coming at Pentecost. . . . All this prepares the reader for Peter's sermon, which is the initial proclamation of the gospel message to a prepared people."¹¹⁸

Barclay pointed out four different kinds of preaching that the early Christians practiced,¹¹⁹ and I would add two more. The first is kerugma, which means proclamation of the clear facts of the Christian message. The second is didache or teaching. This was explanation and interpretation of the facts--the "so what?" Third, there was paraklesis, exhortation to apply the message. Fourth, there was homilia, the treatment of a subject or area of life in view of the Christian message. Fifth, there was prophesia, the sharing of a word from God be it new revelation or old. Sixth, there was apologia, a defense of the Christian message in the face of hostile adversaries. Often the speaker combined two or more of these kinds of address into one message as Peter did in the sermon that follows. Here we find defense (vv. 14-21), proclamation (vv. 22-36), and exhortation (vv. 37-41).

Constable: Act 2:22-36

Peter's proclamation 2:22-36

In this part of his speech Peter cited three proofs that Jesus was the Messiah: His miracles (v. 22), His resurrection (vv. 23-32), and His ascension (vv. 33-35). Verse 36 is a summary conclusion.

2:22 Peter argued that God had attested to Jesus' Messiahship by performing miracles through Him. "Miracles" is the general word, which Peter defined further as wonders (miracles eliciting awe) and signs (miracles signifying something).¹³⁹ Jesus' miracles attested the fact that God had empowered Him (cf. John 3:2), and they led many people who witnessed them to conclude that He was the Son of David (Matt. 12:23). Others, however, chose to believe that He received His power from Satan rather than God (Matt. 12:24).

2:23 Peter pointed out that Jesus' crucifixion had been no accident but was part of God's eternal plan (cf. 3:18; 4:28; 13:29). Peter laid guilt for Jesus' death at the Jews' feet (cf. v. 36; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 7:52; 10:39; 13:28) and on the Gentile Romans (cf. 4:27; Luke 3:24-25). Note Peter's reference to both the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man in this verse. The ultimate cause of Jesus' death was God's plan and foreknowledge, but the secondary cause was the antagonism of godless Jewish and Roman men. Really the sins of every human being put Jesus on the cross.

2:24 God, a higher Judge, reversed the decision of Jesus' human judges by resurrecting Him. God released Jesus' from the pangs of death (Gr. odinas tou thanatou), namely its awful clutches (cf. 2 Sam. 22:6; Ps. 18:4-6; 116:3). A higher court in heaven overturned the decision of the lower courts on earth. It was impossible for death to hold Jesus because He had committed no sins Himself. He had not personally earned the wages of sin (Rom. 6:23), but He voluntarily took upon Himself the sins of others.

2:25 Peter appealed to Psalm 16:8-11 to prove that David prophesied Messiah's resurrection in the Jewish Scriptures. Psalm 16 is perhaps the clearest prediction of Messiah's resurrection in the Old Testament. As earlier (1:20), Peter saw that Messiah's (Jesus') experiences fulfilled David's words.

In this Psalm David spoke of God as being at his right hand, a figure for close association and powerful assistance. Peter saw Jesus' presence in heaven at God's right hand as an extension of what David had written.

2:26 God's presence with David made him happy and hopeful. Likewise the fact that Jesus was now at God's right hand made Peter happy and hopeful.

2:27 David said he would not go to Hades (the place of departed spirits, Old Testament Sheol), and his body would not suffer decay. This was a poetic way of expressing his belief that God would not allow him to experience ultimate humiliation. David referred to himself as God's devout one. Peter saw this fulfilled literally in Jesus' resurrection from the grave after only three days. Jesus was the supremely devout one.

2:28 David ended this psalm by rejoicing that, in spite of his adversaries, God would spare his life and enable him to enjoy God's presence in the future. Peter interpreted these statements as referring to Jesus' entering into new life following His resurrection and into God's presence following His ascension.

"Peter quotes from Psalm 16, not to teach that Christ is on the Davidic throne, but rather to show that David predicted the resurrection and enthronement of Christ after His death. The enthronement on David's throne is a yet-future event while the enthronement at His Father's right hand is an accomplished fact."¹⁴⁰

2:29-31 Peter next argued that David's words just quoted could not refer literally to David since David had indeed died and his body had undergone corruption. David's words were a prophecy that referred to Messiah as well as a description of his own experience. God's oath to place one of David's descendants on his throne as Israel's king is in Psalm 132:11 (cf. 2 Sam. 7:16).¹⁴¹

Peter did not say that Jesus now sits on David's throne (v. 30).¹⁴² He said that David prophesied that God had sworn to seat a descendant of David on David's throne. Jesus now sits on a throne in heaven, but He has yet to sit on David's throne, which is a throne on earth. He will sit on David's throne when He returns to the earth to reign as Messiah.

2:32 Peter equated Jesus with the Christ (Messiah, v. 31). He also attributed Jesus' resurrection to God again (cf. v. 24). The resurrection of Jesus Christ was one of the apostles' strongest emphases (cf. 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 33-34, 37; 17:31; 26:23). They proceeded to bear witness to what they had seen and heard as Christ had commanded and foretold (1:8).

2:33 Peter next explained that it was Jesus, now at God's right hand, who had poured forth the promised Holy Spirit from the Father (John 14:16-17, 26; 15:26-27). The evidence of this was the tongues of fire and demonstration of tongues that his audience saw and heard.

Peter mentioned all three members of the Trinity in this verse.

2:34-35 Peter then added a second evidence that Jesus was the Christ. He had proved that David had prophesied Messiah's resurrection (v. 27). Now he said that David also prophesied Messiah's ascension (Ps. 110:1). This was a passage from the Old Testament that Jesus had earlier applied to Himself (Matt. 22:43-44; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-42). It may have been Jesus' use of this passage that enabled His disciples to grasp the significance of His resurrection. It may also have served as the key to their understanding of these prophecies of Messiah in the Old Testament.¹⁴³

David evidently meant that the LORD (Yahweh, God the Father) said the following to David's Lord (Adonai, Master, evidently a reference to Messiah or possibly Solomon).¹⁴⁴ Yahweh, the true King of Israel, extended the privilege of serving as His administrator to Messiah (or Solomon), His vice-regent. Yahweh included a promise that He would subdue His vice-regent's enemies. Peter took this passage as a prophecy about David's greatest son, Messiah. Yahweh said to David's Lord, Messiah, sit beside me and rule for me, and I will subdue your enemies. This is something God the Father said to God the Son. Peter understood David's reference to his Lord as extending to Messiah, David's ultimate descendant.

"Peter's statement that Jesus is presently at the right hand of God,' in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1, has been a focal point of disagreement between dispensational and non-dispensational interpreters. Traditional dispensationalists have understood this as teaching the present session of Christ in heaven before his return to fulfill the Davidic messianic kingdom promise of a literal reign on earth. They are careful to distinguish between the Davidic throne and the position that Christ presently occupies in heaven at the right hand of God (Ac 2:30).¹⁴⁵

"Non-dispensationalists, by contrast, see Peter's statement as a clear indication that the New Testament has reinterpreted the Davidic messianic prophecies. The messianic throne has been transferred from Jerusalem to heaven, and Jesus has begun his messianic reign as the Davidic king.'¹⁴⁶"¹⁴⁷

"This does not mean that Jesus is at the present time ruling from the throne of David, but that He is now at the right hand of the Father' until His enemies are vanquished (Acts 2:33-35)."¹⁴⁸

". . . it is preferable to see David's earthly throne as different from the Lord's heavenly throne, because of the different contexts of Psalms 110 and 132. Psalm 110 refers to the Lord's throne (v. 1) and a Melchizedekian priesthood (v. 4) but Psalm 132 refers to David's throne (v. 11) and (Aaronic) priests (vv. 9, 16). . . .

"Because the Messiah is the anointed Descendant of David and the Davidic Heir, He presently possesses the right to reign though He has not yet assumed David's throne. This was also true of David, who assumed the throne over Israel years after he was anointed.

"Before Christ will be seated on David's throne (Ps. 110:2), He is seated at the right hand of God (v. 1). His present session is a position of honor and power, but the exercise of that power is restricted to what God has chosen to give the Son. God the Father reigns and has decreed that Christ dispense blessings from the Holy Spirit to believers in this present age. When Christ returns to earth to begin His messianic reign on David's throne, He will conquer His enemies (Ps. 110:2, 5-7). Until then, He is now seated at God's right hand (v. 1), exercising the decreed role of the Melchizedekian King-Priest (v. 4), the believer's great High Priest (Heb. 2:17; 4:14-15; 5:10; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1; 9:11; 10:21)."¹⁴⁹

"Christ's enthronement at the time of His ascension was not to David's throne, but rather was a restoration to the position at His Father's right hand (Heb. 1:3; Acts 7:56), which position He had given up at the time of the Incarnation (Phil. 2:6-8). It was for this restoration that Christ had prayed to His Father in John 17:5. Since Christ had never occupied David's throne before the Incarnation it would have been impossible to restore Him to what He had not occupied previously. He was petitioning the Father to restore Him to His place at the Father's right hand. Peter, in his message, establishes the fact of resurrection by testifying to the Ascension, for one who had not been resurrected could not ascend."¹⁵⁰

Normative dispensationalists:	Christ's messianic reign will be on earth.
Progressive dispensationalists:	Christ's messianic reign is now from heaven and will be on earth.
Non-dispensational premillenarians:	Christ's messianic reign is now from heaven and will be on earth.
Non-millennarians:	Christ's messianic reign is now and will be from heaven.

2:36 Peter wanted every Israelite to consider the evidence he had just presented because it proved "for certain" that Jesus of Nazareth (cf. v. 22) was God's sovereign ruler (Lord) and anointed Messiah (Christ). It is clear from the context that by "Lord" Peter was speaking of Jesus as the Father's co-regent. He referred to the same "Lord" he had mentioned in verse 21.

"This title of Lord' was a more important title than Messiah, for it pictured Jesus' total authority and His ability and right to serve as an equal with God the Father."¹⁵¹

Normative dispensationalists (both classical and revised, to use Craig Blaising's distinctions¹⁵²) hold that Peter only meant that Jesus of Nazareth was the Davidic Messiah. Progressive dispensationalists, along with covenant theologians, believe that Peter meant that Jesus not only was the Davidic Messiah but that He was also reigning as the Davidic Messiah then. Thus the Davidic messianic kingdom had begun. Its present (already) phase is with Jesus on the Davidic throne ruling from heaven. and its future (not yet) phase will be when Jesus returns to earth to rule on earth.

Progressive dispensationalists (and covenant theologians) also believe that Jesus' reign as Messiah began during his earthly ministry.¹⁵³ They see the church as the present stage in the progressive unfolding of the messianic kingdom (hence the name "progressive dispensationalism"¹⁵⁴). Normative dispensationalists interpret the Davidic kingdom as entirely earthly and say that Jesus has not yet begun His messianic reign. He now sits on the Father's throne in heaven ruling sovereignly, not on David's throne fulfilling Old Testament prophecies concerning the Davidic king's future reign (cf. Rev. 3:21).

Peter again mentioned his hearers' responsibility for crucifying Jesus to convict them of their sin and to make them feel guilty (cf. v. 23).¹⁵⁵

"The beginning and ending of the main body of the speech emphasize the function of disclosure. Peter begins, Let this be known to you,' and concludes, Therefore, let the whole house of Israel know assuredly . . .,' forming an inclusion (2:14, 36). In the context this is a new disclosure, for it is the first public proclamation of Jesus' resurrection and its significance. Acts 2:22-36 is a compact, carefully constructed argument leading to the conclusion in v. 36: God made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.' Peter not only proclaims Jesus' authority but also reveals the intolerable situation of the audience, who share responsibility for Jesus' crucifixion. The Pentecost speech is part of a recognition scene, where, in the manner of tragedy, persons who have acted blindly against their own best interests suddenly recognize their error."¹⁵⁶

"The Pentecost speech is primarily the disclosure to its audience of God's surprising reversal of their intentions, for their rejection has ironically resulted in Jesus' exaltation as Messiah, Spirit-giver, and source of repentance and forgiveness."¹⁵⁷

God bestowed His Spirit on the believers on Pentecost and subsequently for the same reason He poured out His Spirit on Jesus Christ when He began His earthly ministry. He did so to empower them to proclaim the gospel of God's grace (cf. 1:8). Luke recorded both outpourings (Luke 3:21-22; Acts 2:2-4; cf. Acts 4:27; 10:28). This fact is further evidence that Luke wanted his readers to view their own ministries as the extension of Jesus' ministry (1:1-2).

"Luke's specific emphasis (and contribution) to NT pneumatology is that the Holy Spirit was poured out on the church not just to incorporate each believer into the body of Christ or provide the greater new covenant intimacy with him, but also to consecrate the church to the task of worldwide prophetic ministry as defined in Luke 4:16-30."¹⁵⁸

Peter mentioned that Jesus was now at the right hand of God in heaven four times in this part of his speech (vv. 25, 30, 33, 34). This had particular relevance for "all the house of Israel" (cf. vv. 14, 22, 29).

"Apparently, therefore, the messiahship of Jesus was the distinctive feature of the church's witness within Jewish circles, signifying, as it does, his fulfillment of Israel's hopes and his culmination of God's redemptive purposes.

"The title Lord' was also proclaimed christologically in Jewish circles, with evident intent to apply to Jesus all that was said of God in the OT . . . . But Lord' came to have particular relevance to the church's witness to Gentiles just as Messiah' was more relevant to the Jewish world. So in Acts Luke reports the proclamation of Jesus the Christ' before Jewish audiences both in Palestine and among the Diaspora, whereas Paul in his letters to Gentile churches generally uses Christ as a proper name and proclaims Christ Jesus the Lord.'"¹⁵⁹

Constable: Act 2:37-41

Peter's exhortation 2:37-41

2:37 The Holy Spirit used Peter's sermon to bring conviction, as Jesus had predicted (John 16:8-11). He convicted Peter's hearers of the truth of what he said and of their guilt in rejecting Jesus. Their question arose from this two-fold response.

Notice the full meaning of their question. These were Jews who had been waiting expectantly for the Messiah to appear. Peter had just explained convincingly that He had come, but the Jewish nation had rejected God's anointed King. Jesus had gone back to heaven. What would happen to the nation over which He was to rule? What were the Jews to do? Their question did not just reflect their personal dilemma but the fate of their nation. What should they do in view of this terrible situation nationally as well as personally?

2:38 Peter told them what to do. They needed to repent. Repentance involves a change of mind and heart first and secondarily a change of conduct. The Greek word translated repentance (metanoia) literally means a change of outlook (from meta and noeo meaning to reconsider). The Jews had formerly regarded Jesus as less than Messiah and had rejected him. Now they needed to accept Him and embrace Him. John the Baptist and Jesus had previously called for repentance in their audiences (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; et al.), and the apostles continued this emphasis (Acts 3:19; 5:31; 8:22; 11:18; 13:24; 17:30; 19:4; 20:21; 26:20).

"The context of repentance which brings eternal life, and that which Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, is a change of mind about Jesus Christ. Whereas the people who heard him on that day formerly thought of Him as mere man, they were asked to accept Him as Lord (Deity) and Christ (promised Messiah). To do this would bring salvation."¹⁶⁰

When people speak of repentance they may mean one of two different things. We use this English word in the sense of a conduct change (turning away from sinful practices). We also use it in the sense of a conceptual change (turning away from false ideas previously held). This has led to some confusion concerning what a person must do to obtain salvation.

"The Greek verb [metanoeo, translated "to repent"] means to change one's mind,' but in its Lucan usage it comes very close to the Hebrew verb for repent which literally means to turn or turn around' (sub). . . . A change of perspective, involving the total person's point of view, is called for by this term. In fact, John called for the Israelites to bring forth fruit worthy of repentance ([Luke] 3:8). This passage is significant for it separates repentance from what it produces, and also expresses a link between repentance and fruit. One leads to the other.

"In summary, Luke saw repentance as a change of perspective that transforms a person's thinking and approach to life."¹⁶¹

If a person just thinks of repentance as turning from sinful practices, repentance becomes a good work that a person does. This kind of repentance is not necessary for salvation for two reasons. First, this is not how the gospel preachers in the New Testament used the word, as one can see from the meaning of the Greek word metanoia (defined above). Second, other Scriptures make it clear that good works, including turning from sin, have no part in justification (e.g., Eph. 2:8-9). God does not save us because of what we do for Him but because of what He has done for us in Christ.¹⁶²

Repentance by definition is not an act separate from trusting Christ. It is part of the process of believing.¹⁶³ When a person trusts Christ, he or she abandons his or her false notions about the Savior and embraces the truth. The truth is that Jesus Christ is God's provision for our eternal salvation. When we rest our confidence in Him and the sufficiency of His cross work for us, God gives us eternal life. This is not just giving mental ascent to facts that are true. Saving faith does that but also places confidence in Christ rather than in self for salvation.¹⁶⁴

". . . it needs ever to be insisted on that the faith that justifies is not a mere intellectual process--not simply crediting certain historical facts or doctrinal statements; but it is a faith that springs from a divinely wrought conviction of sin which produces a repentance that is sincere and genuine."¹⁶⁵

Peter called for individual repentance ("each of you," Gr. second person plural). The Jews thought corporately about their responsibilities as God's chosen people, but Peter confronted them with their individual responsibility to believe in Jesus.

The New Testament uses the word baptism in two ways: Spirit baptism and water baptism. This raises the question of which type Peter was calling for here. In verse 38 "baptism" is probably water baptism, as most commentators point out. A few of them believe that Peter was referring to Spirit baptism in the sense of becoming identified with Christ.

"The baptism of the Spirit which it was our Lord's prerogative to bestow was, strictly speaking, something that took place once for all on the day of Pentecost when He poured forth the promise of the Father' on His disciples and thus constituted them the new people of God; baptism in water continued to be the external sign by which individuals who believed the gospel message, repented of their sins, and acknowledged Jesus as Lord, were publicly incorporated into the Spirit-baptized fellowship of the new people of God."¹⁶⁶

This verse is a major proof text for those who believe that water baptism is essential for salvation.¹⁶⁷ Many people refer to this viewpoint as sacramental theology as contrasted with evangelical theology. It encounters its greatest problem with passages that make the forgiveness of sin, and salvation in general, dependent on nothing but trust in Christ (e.g., Acts 15:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; Luke 24:47; John 3:16, 36; Rom. 4:1-17; 11:6; Gal. 3:8-9; Eph. 2:8-9).¹⁶⁸ Peter later promised forgiveness of sins on the basis of faith alone (5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18).

". . . Christian [water] baptism was an expression of faith and commitment to Jesus as Lord."¹⁶⁹

What is the relationship of repentance, water baptism, forgiveness, and the gift of the Spirit that this verse brings together? At least three explanations are possible if we rule out the idea that baptism results in the forgiveness of sins.¹⁷⁰

1. One acceptable option is to take the Greek preposition translated "for" (eis) as "because of" or "on the basis of." This is not the usual meaning of the word. The usual meaning is "for" designating aim or purpose. However it clearly means "because of" in some passages (e.g., Matt. 3:11; 12:14; Mark 1:4). This explanation links forgiveness with baptizing. We could paraphrase this view as follows. "Repent and you will receive the gift of the Spirit. Be baptized because your sins are forgiven."¹⁷¹

2. Other interpreters emphasize the correspondence between the number (singular and plural) of the verbs and pronouns in the two parts of the sentence. "Repent" is plural as is "your," and "be baptized" and "you" (in "each of you") are singular.

Repent (second person plural)

be baptized (third person singular)

each (third person singular) of you

for the forgiveness of your (second person plural) sins

According to this view Peter was saying, "You [all] repent for [the purpose of] the forgiveness of your sins, and you [all] will receive the Spirit." Then he added parenthetically, "And each of you [singular] be baptized [as a testimony to your faith]." This explanation links forgiveness with repentance.¹⁷²

"Repentance demands the witness of baptism; forgiveness is followed by the gift of the Holy Spirit [i.e., Spirit baptism]."¹⁷³

3. A third, less popular, view is that God withheld Spirit baptism from Palestinian converts to Christianity when the church was in its infancy. He did so until they had entered into communion with God by obeying His command to undergo baptism in water (Acts 2:38; 22:16). Their Christian experience unfolded in this sequence of events: regeneration, water baptism, forgiveness of sins, fellowship with God, Spirit baptism. These Palestinian converts were individuals who had exposure to but had rejected the ministries of both John the Baptist and Jesus. One advocate of this view felt that it accounts best for the instances of Spirit baptism in Acts 2:38; 8:12-17; 19:1-7; and 22:16. He took these occurrences as non-normative Christian experience unique in the early years of Christianity. Acts 10:43-48 reflects normative Christian experience where regeneration, forgiveness, and Spirit baptism take place simultaneously with water baptism following. By the time Paul wrote Romans this later sequence had become normative (Rom. 8:9; cf. 1 Cor. 12:13).¹⁷⁴

Baptism in water was common in both Judaism and early Christianity. Converts to Judaism commonly baptized themselves in water publicly as a testimony to their conversion. The apostles evidently took for granted that the person who trusted in Christ would then submit to baptism in water.

". . . the idea of an unbaptized Christian is simply not entertained in [the] NT."¹⁷⁵

"Since baptism signifies association with the message, group, or person involved in authorizing it [cf. 1 Cor. 10:1-2], baptism in the name of Jesus Christ meant for these people a severing of their ties with Judaism and an association with the messages of Jesus and His people. Baptism was the line of demarcation. Even today for a Jew it is not his profession of Christianity nor his attendance at Christian services nor his acceptance of the New Testament, but his submission to water baptism that definitely and finally excludes him from the Jewish community and marks him off as a Christian."¹⁷⁶

The gift of the Holy Spirit was baptism with the Spirit. The Spirit is the gift. Peter connected reception of the Spirit with repentance. The Holy Spirit baptized those who repented immediately (11:15). Their Spirit baptism was not a later "second blessing."

Notice that Peter said nothing in this verse about acknowledging Jesus as Lord in the sense of surrendering completely to His lordship to receive eternal life. Those who contend that submission to the lordship of Christ is essential for salvation must admit that Peter did not make that a requirement here. This would have been the perfect opportunity for him to do so. Peter did not mention submission to the lordship of Christ because he did not believe it was essential for salvation. Admittedly he referred to Jesus as Lord in verse 36, but as I have explained, the context argues for "Lord" meaning God rather than master there.¹⁷⁷

2:39 The "promise" is the gift of the Holy Spirit (1:5, 8; 2:33). Those "far off" probably include the Diaspora Jews and the Gentiles. Peter had already expressed his belief that Gentiles could be saved (v. 21; cf. Joel 2:32), a fact taught repeatedly in both the Old and the New Testament. Peter's later problem involving the salvation of Cornelius was not due to a conviction that Gentiles were unsaveable. It was a question of the manner by which they became Christians (i.e., not through Judaism, but directly without becoming Jews first). Note, too, Peter's firm belief in God's sovereignty (cf. v. 23). God takes the initiative in calling the elect to salvation, and then they repent (v. 38; cf. John 6:37; Rom. 8:28-30).

2:40 The Greek word translated "generation" (genea) sometimes has a wider scope than simply all the people living within the same generational period. It has a metaphorical meaning here as elsewhere (e.g., Matt. 17:17; Mark 9:19; 13:30; Luke 9:41; 16:8). It means "a race of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character; and especially in a bad sense a perverse race."¹⁷⁸ Here the reference seems to be to unbelieving Jews of all time but particularly those living during Peter's lifetime. "Generation" in this larger sense is virtually the same as "race."

Jesus had announced that the actual generation of Jews who had rejected Him would experience God's judgment on themselves and their nation (Matt. 21:41-44; 22:7; 23:34-24:2). In view of that prediction it seems that Peter may have had that impending judgment in mind when he issued this call to his hearers. Jesus' promised judgment fell in 70 A.D. when Titus invaded Jerusalem, destroyed the temple, and scattered the Jews.

"This exhortation shows that Peter viewed that generation under the physical, temporal judgment about which Christ had spoken so forcefully and clearly. What Jesus had warned them about earlier (Matt. 12:31-32) had come on them and was inescapable. . . .

"While judgment on the nation was inescapable, individuals could be delivered from it. Peter's answer was, Be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven,' that is, they were no longer to participate in the repeated sin of the nation in rejecting Christ. The confession of their faith in Christ and of their identification with him by baptism would demonstrate their separation from the nation. They would be put out of the synagogue and lose all identity in the nation. Thus, by this separation they would individually not undergo the judgment on that generation since they ceased to be a part of it. Baptism did not save them. Only their faith in the One in whose name they were being baptized could do that. But baptism did terminate their identity with the nation so that they could escape its judgment."¹⁷⁹

2:41 Peter had called on his audience to repent and to be baptized (v. 38). Luke recorded the response of the believers. This reference, too, is probably to water baptism.

More people may have become Christians on this one day than did so during the whole earthly ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. John 14:12). Luke evidently meant that 3,000 were added to the 120 mentioned in 1:15 since he was describing the visible relationships of the believers.¹⁸⁰

Some interpreters believe that this verse does not describe what took place immediately following the conclusion of Peter's sermon, however. Luke may have been summing up the results of Peter's preaching as a new point of departure in his narrative. He often used the Greek word translated "then" (men) in Acts to do this. Furthermore "day" (hemera) can refer to a longer time as well as to one 24-hour period. Here it could refer to the first period in the church's life.¹⁸¹

The period between the death of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was a transitional period. The tearing of the temple veil when Jesus died (Matt. 27:51) symbolized the termination of the old Mosaic order and the beginning of a new order. The new order began when Jesus Christ died. However it took nearly four decades for God's people to make the transition in their thinking and practice. The Book of Acts documents many of those transitions.

"The transition was extensive. Ethnically, there was a transition from dealing primarily with Jews to dealing with both Jew and Gentile without distinction. There was also a transition in the people with whom God was dealing, from Israel to the church. Likewise, there was a transition in the principle on which God was dealing with men, from Law to grace. There was a transition from the offer to Israel of an earthly Davidic kingdom to the offer to all men of salvation based on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There was a transition from the prospect of Messiah's coming to the historical fact that the promised One had come. There was a transition from the promise that the Spirit would be given to the historical fact that the Spirit had come.

"Again, all these transitions were made positionally in the brief period of time from the death of Christ to the Day of Pentecost. Yet experientially these truths were understood and entered into only over a span of some four decades. The Book of Acts records the positional transition as well as the experiential transition in the development of the theocratic kingdom program."¹⁸²

". . . the Book of the Acts is particularly valuable as giving to us the earliest models of several ordinances and institutions which have since become part of the life of the Christian Church. These first occasions should be studied as types and models of what all subsequent occasions should be.

"The first descent of the Spirit (chap. 2); the first Christian preaching (chap. 2); the first Christian Church (chap. 2); the first opposition to Christianity (chap. 4); the first persecution (chap. 4); the first prayer meeting (chap. 4); the first sin in the Church (chap. 5); the first Church problem (chap. 6); the first martyr (chap. 7); the first Church extension (chap. 8); the first personal dealing (chap. 8); the first Gentile Church (chap. 11); the first Church Council (chap. 11).

"The first missionary (chap. 13); the first missionary methods (chaps. 13, 14); the first Church contention (chap. 15); the first Church in Europe (chap. 16); the first address to Christian ministers (chap. 20)."¹⁸³

". . . what Acts aims to do is to give us a series of typical exploits and adventures of the great heroic figures of the early Church."¹⁸⁴

Constable: Act 2:42-47

6. The early state of the church 2:42-47

Luke now moved from describing what took place on a particular day to a more general description of the life of the early Jerusalem church (cf. 4:32-5:11; 6:1-6). Interestingly he gave comparatively little attention to the internal life of the church in Acts. His selection of content shows that his purpose was to stress its outward expansion.

2:42 These new converts along with the disciples gave ("devoted," Gr. proskartereo, cf. 1:14) themselves to two activities primarily: the apostles' teaching and fellowship. The grammar of the Greek sentence sets these actions off as distinct from the following two activities that define fellowship. The apostles' teaching included the Jewish Scriptures as well as the teachings of Christ on earth and the revelations He gave to the apostles from heaven. This means the early Christians gave priority to the revealed Word of God.¹⁸⁵

"The steady persistence in the apostles' teaching means (a) that the Christians listened to the apostles whenever they taught and (b) that they assiduously practised what they heard."¹⁸⁶

The fellowship (Gr. te koinonia) refers to sharing things with others. The presence of the article with fellowship indicates that this fellowship was distinctive. It was a fellowship within Judaism. Even though their fellowship extended to material goods its primary reference must be to the ideas, attitudes, purposes, mission, and activities that the Christians shared.

Two distinctive activities marked the fellowship of the early church. The "breaking of bread" is a term that here probably included the Lord's Supper as well as eating a meal together (cf. v. 46; 20:7; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:23-25; Jude 12).¹⁸⁷ Elsewhere the phrase describes both an ordinary meal (Luke 24:30, 35; Acts 20:11; 27:35) and the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:24). Probably these early Christians ate together and as part of the meal, or after it, used their common food, bread and wine, to commemorate Christ's death.¹⁸⁸

In "the prayers" the believers must have praised and thanked God as well as petitioning and interceding for His glory (cf. Matt. 6:9-13). The article with prayer probably implies formal times of prayer (cf. 1:14), though they undoubtedly prayed together at other times too.¹⁸⁹

"Just as Luke has set up in Luke-Acts the parallelism between the Spirit's work in relation to Jesus and the Spirit's work in the church, so he also sets up the parallelism between prayer in the life of Jesus and prayer in the life of the church."¹⁹⁰

"Prayer is an expression of dependence, and when the people of God really feel their need you will find them flocking together to pray. A neglected prayer meeting indicates very little recognition of one's true need."¹⁹¹

Their persistence in these activities demonstrated their felt need to learn, to encourage one another, to refocus on Christ's death, and to praise and petition God (1:1).

2:43 The feeling of awe that the obvious working of God in their midst inspired continued among all the people in Jerusalem. The wonder-inspiring miracles that the apostles performed pointed to God's hand at work and kept this spirit alive. Not the least of these wonders must have been the remarkable unity and self-sacrifice of the believers. Compare 2:22, where Peter said Jesus had done "wonders and signs," with this verse, where Luke wrote that the apostles performed "wonders and signs." This shows again Jesus' continuing work through His servants following His ascension.¹⁹²

2:44-45 These early believers had frequent contact with each other. Communal living was voluntary and temporary in the Jerusalem church (4:32, 34-35; 5:4); it was not forced socialism or communism. No other New Testament church practiced communal living to the extent that the Jerusalem Christians did. The New Testament nowhere commands communal living, and Acts does not refer to it after chapter five.¹⁹³

Their willingness to sell their property (real estate, cf. 5:37) and personal possessions to help others in need demonstrated true Christian love. They were probably giving to non-believers as well as to their Christian brethren, but what Luke stressed was their sacrificial giving to one another. Beside Christian love it may have been their hope that Jesus Christ would return very soon that motivated them to live as they did. Furthermore since Jesus had predicted judgment on Jerusalem, what was the use of keeping property?

2:46-47 This progress report summarizes the growth of the church thus far. It is one of seven in Acts each of which concludes a major advance of the church in its worldwide mission (cf. 6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:30-31).

The believers met with one another daily, enjoying the unity of the Spirit. They congregated in the temple area probably for discussion and evangelization (cf. 3:11; 5:12). Probably these Jewish believers considered themselves the true remnant within Israel until they began to realize the distinctiveness of the church. They ate meals and observed the Lord's Supper together in homes. In the ancient Near East eating together reflected a common commitment to one another and deep fellowship. A meal shared together was both a mark and a seal of friendship. In contemporary pagan religions the meal formed the central rite of the religion because it established communion between the worshippers and between the worshippers and their god. In Judaism too eating some of the offerings of worship symbolized these things, especially the peace offering.

Public church buildings were unknown until the third century. At the time chapter two records, there was no significant opposition to the Christian movement, though there was, of course, difference of opinion about Jesus. The believers enjoyed the blessing of their Jewish brethren. People trusted Christ daily, and the Lord added these to the church so that it grew steadily. Luke, in harmony with his purpose (1:1-2), stressed the Lord Jesus' work in causing the church to grow (v. 47; cf. Matt. 16:18).

". . . this is one of the few references in Acts to the Christians worshipping God in the sense of rendering thanks to him. The fewness of such phrases reminds us that according to the New Testament witness Christian gatherings were for instruction, fellowship, and prayer; in other words for the benefit of the people taking part; there is less mention of the worship of God, although of course this element was not absent."¹⁹⁴

"Christianity was no proletarian movement. It appealed to a broad spectrum of classes."¹⁹⁵

College: Act 2:1-47

ACTS 2

F. THE DAY OF PENTECOST (2:1-47)

1. The Apostles Baptized with the Holy Spirit (2:1-4)

¹ When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. ² Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. ³ They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. ⁴ All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues ^a as the Spirit enabled them.

^a 4 Or languages ; also in verse 11

Just as Jesus had promised, the Holy Spirit was about to come on the apostles in a dramatic way. The day on which this occurred was the Day of Pentecost. In the Jewish calendar, Pentecost was the second of the three major feasts. It fell fifty days after the Sabbath of Passover week (Lev 23:15-16). In the Old Testament it was also known as the Feast of Weeks (Deut 16:10), the Feast of Harvest (Exod 23:16), and the Day of Firstfruits (Num 28:26).

More important than the day in the Jewish calendar was what Pentecost came to represent. With the giving of the Spirit, this day became the birthday of the church. As James D.G. Dunn observes, Pentecost was the dividing line between the Old Covenant and the New. The ascension recorded in Acts 1 serves to prepare for the epochal event of Pentecost in Acts 2. Pentecost, says Dunn, " inaugurates the age of the Church."

The place in which they were gathered may have been the upper room referred to in 1:13. The group that was gathered is spoken of as " they." It is not easy to decide whether this pronoun describes only the apostles or also the 120 believers. Grammatically speaking, the nearest antecedent is " the apostles" in 1:26. This reference also seems likely in light of the promise Jesus made to the apostles that they would receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit to become his witnesses (see Acts 1:5,8). Some scholars, however, point to the prophecy of Joel (see Acts 2:18) as an indication that women were included in the group which gathered at this time. They also find in the gathering of the great crowd an indication that the Spirit fell on more than just the twelve apostles.

What was experienced is recorded in some detail. The Holy Spirit was poured out from heaven (v. 17). He arrived in a mannerthat was both seen and heard. A sound suddenly filled the room, which reminded them of a powerful, roaring wind from heaven. Flames (" tongues;" glw'ssai, gl―ossai ) of fire appeared which seemed to shoot out and hover above the head of each one there.

The significance of these elements is first in the fact that they are miraculous displays of divine power. More particularly, the experience was a reminder of the numerous times that the Spirit was compared to the wind. Ezekiel spoke of how the wind blew and God breathed life into the dry bones (see Ezek 337:9-14). Jesus told Nicodemus that the Spirit, like the wind, produces results which are obvious though no one sees him (see John 3:8). Fire was the element present when Moses saw the burning bush and heard the voice of God (see Exod 3:2-5). John the Baptist had predicted that Jesus would soon baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire (see Luke 3:16).

Along with these signs of the Spirit's coming there also came the ability to speak with " other tongues." The term for " tongues" ( gl―ossai ) is often used to speak of languages used throughout the world, and here the context dictates that this meaning is intended. The crowd was amazed that these Galileans could speak words in so many languages spoken outside of Galilee (see v. 7). Here were twelve men who by a miracle of God were speaking in languages they should not have known.

The explanation of this miracle is included in the narrative. " All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit" in such a way that the Spirit " enabled them" to speak the languages of the audience which had gathered. Little detail is supplied here regarding the mechanics of this miracle of speech. The term " enabled" (ajpofqevggomai, apophthengomai ) does not appear to include the idea of ecstatic speech, though it does carry the idea of speaking in an inspired way. The filling of the Spirit is mentioned in Acts 9:17 in the case of Saul of Tarsus. For the apostles it corresponds to the promise of the baptism of the Spirit. The language of Acts 11:16-17 suggests that the experience of the apostles and that of Cornelius established an expectation that the Spirit, in some form, would be given to all believers. Acts 2:39 reinforces this wide availability of God's Spirit.

The mention of speaking in these languages invites comparisons with Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 12-14. Many commentators argue that what is there referred to as " spiritual gifts" is not the same phenomenon described in Acts. The basis for the distinction is that Paul's language characterizes " speaking in tongues" as a " praise language" addressed only to God and unintelligible to everyone else. By contrast, Acts 2 portrays speaking in tongues as languages understood by those who were visiting in Jerusalem. Both passages, however, use the term gl―ossa in reference to the gift. In 2:11 the content of their speaking in tongues is " declaring the wonders of God," a phrase that bears similarities with Paul's description in 1 Corinthians 14:13-17.

2. The Amazement of the Crowd (2:5-13)

⁵ Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. ⁶ When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. ⁷ Utterly amazed, they asked: " Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? ⁸ Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? ⁹ Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, ¹⁰ Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome ¹¹ (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs-we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" ¹² Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, " What does this mean?" ¹³ Some, however, made fun of them and said, " They have had too much wine. ^a"

^a 13 Or sweet wine

The commotion caused by the Spirit's descent could not be hidden. Whether it was the " sound" of the roaring wind or the noisy speaking from the apostles, a crowd began to gather, probably from the temple area. This location would be the only place where 3000 people could assemble (see 2:41).

Bewilderment was the most appropriate description for the spectators who arrived. Luke spares few adjectives in reporting the astonishment of the crowd. They were bewildered (v. 6), " utterly amazed" (v. 7), " amazed and perplexed" (v. 12). They wondered aloud how these Galileans could be speaking in dialects so foreign to Palestine.

To emphasize the far-reaching nature of these languages, Luke now includes a list of nations represented in the gathering. He reports that in Jerusalem resided devout Jews " from every nation under heaven." Whether these residents were pilgrims to Jerusalem because of the Feast of Pentecost or permanent residents from the communities of Diaspora Jews is not clear. Whichever the case, these Jews were startled to hear the apostles speaking in languages other than Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek.

The list of nations here is a rough sweep that begins in the eastern part of the Roman world and works its way west. The list begins in present-day Iran (Parthia) and mentions Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, all territories which are located east of the Euphrates River. These areas held large concentrations of Jews since the days of the exiles. The next areas mentioned are located westward and northward. Judea is given, possibly as a substitute for Syria. Then attention swings north to Cappadocia and Pontus, territories in central and northern Turkey. Next comes Asia on the western coast, followed by Phrygia and Pamphylia farther inland. Now a full circle is completed with the mention of territories in North Africa. Egypt and Libya are included at this point in the list. Then comes the mention of Rome, the island of Crete and finally Arabia, the first-century Nabatean kingdom east of the Dead Sea.

Plenty of evidence has been found to establish the presence of Jews in all of these locations sufficient for the account given here by Luke. In addition to Jews, 2:11 suggests that Gentiles were a part of the audience hearing the apostles. " Converts to Judaism" comes from the term for " proselyte" and refers to Gentiles who associated themselves with Judaism through circumcision (for male converts), a self-baptism for purification, and an offering at the temple in Jerusalem. The status that proselytes occupied gave them a more formal participation in Jewish life and worship than did the less formal status of the " God-fearer" (a status mentioned later as held by Cornelius in 10:2).

Such a world-wide representation of nations only serves to amplify the astounding miracle which was witnessed. Luke is emphatic that the miracle which shocked the crowd was that their home dialect was being spoken here in Jerusalem by Galileans. Evidently many in the crowd understood the incident as a sign from God. The question they asked implies this much. They wondered about the meaning of what they were witnessing. Others in the crowd dismissed this possibility. They saw nothing spiritual going on here. With stubborn cynicism they explained the whole event as the result of the all too common effects of intoxicating drink. Their rejection of the amazing presence of the Spirit is the first among many such rejections which are chronicled in the Book of Acts.

3. The Sermon of Peter (2:14-36)

The Promise of Joel (2:14-21)

¹⁴ Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: " Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. ¹⁵ These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning! ¹⁶ No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: ¹⁷ 'In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. ¹⁸ Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy. ¹⁹ I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and billows of smoke. ²⁰ The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. ²¹ And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' ^a

^a 21 Joel 2:28-32

Peter responded to the questions and accusations of the crowd by calling attention to the Old Testament prophet Joel. He would not let stand the uninformed charges of skeptics. With a boldness typical for Peter, he stepped forward to represent the other apostles and addressed the crowd. The term for " addressed" is also used in 2:4 and calls attention to the inspired quality of Peter's speech.

Peter's first words were intended to refute the accusations of drunkenness. With a hint of humor, he calls attention to the early hour. Nine a.m. (the third hour) was usually the hour of prayer, after which Jews would take their first food. People generally need more time to get drunk.

The true explanation of this event was what Joel had foretold (Joel 2:28-32). At this point Peter launched into a discussion of themes which appear in many of the sermons recorded in Acts. The emphasis on the dawning of the age of the Messiah, the universal appeal of the gospel, and the hope of restoration by a merciful God are themes which appear again and again. Even the structure of Peter's address shows similarities with other sermons in Acts (such as in chapters 3, 10, and 13). His explanation of the sign from God (2:14-21) is followed by an affirmation of the central facts of the gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (2:22-36), and an exhortation to repentance and baptism (2:37-40).

Joel's words were directed toward God's people at a time when God's judgment was being felt. A plague of locusts had ruined the land. Joel called upon the people to repent of their sins and to look expectantly for the restoration of prosperity and the coming age of the Messiah when the Spirit would be poured out upon everybody.

Peter began his sermon by announcing that " this is what was spoken" by Joel. " I will pour out my Spirit in those days," the Lord had promised, and Peter saw in these words the explanation of the events of this Pentecost. " The last days" described in the Old Testament the time when God's purposes would be fulfilled (see Isa 2:2; Hos 3:5; Mic 4:1; also Heb 1:1; 1 Pet 1:20; 1 John 2:18). In the Hebrew quotation the word is " afterward" and the Septuagint has " after these things." Peter was interpreting this phrase to mean " the last days."

The prophecy foretold the giving of the Spirit to all believers. Phrases such as " on all people," " sons and daughters," and " both men and women," vividly make the point. Even the term " pour out" (ekcew', ekche―o ) implies that God intends for a universal reception of the Holy Spirit in the new age. The wide extent of the reception of the Spirit was just the opposite of the restricted ministry of the Spirit in the Old Testament. What Joel promised would bring to pass the sentiments of Moses who exclaimed, " I wish that all the Lord's people were prophets and that the Lord would put his Spirit on them" (Num 11:29).

The mention of " sons and daughters" in v. 17 and " my servants" in v. 18 is meant as a Hebrew parallelism. One group is intended rather than two distinct groups. The sons and daughters are also servants of God. It is significant that the Spirit's ministry would also include women, and Paul later deals with the Corinthian women who exercised spiritual gifts.

In vv. 19-20 several signs are described which may be understood either as figurative or literal. The wonders in heaven may be figurative language which points to a new cosmic order being instituted by God in Christ Jesus. On the other hand, Jerusalem had experienced some of these signs literally on the day Jesus was crucified. It may be, however, that these words are best understood in connection with the final appearing of Jesus and the day of judgment (see 2 Peter 3:7-10).

At any rate, this new age would be dominated by a salvation available to anyone who sought it. Peter's quotation of Joel's prophecy stops with a word about salvation as if to highlight the point. " Lord" here is taken as a reference to Jesus Christ and connects with what follows in Peter's remarks (see 2:36).

The Proclamation of Jesus' Resurrection (2:22-28)

²²" Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. ²³ This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, ^a put him to death by nailing him to the cross. ²⁴ But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. ²⁵ David said about him: 'I saw the Lord always before me. Because he is at my right hand, I will not be shaken. ²⁶ Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will live in hope, ²⁷ because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay. ²⁸ You have made known to me the paths of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence.' ^b

^a 23 Or of those not having the law (that is, Gentiles) ^a 28 Psalm 16:8-11

After giving adequate attention to why the miracle of the languages had occurred, Peter moved to the central theme of his message-the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Peter placed blame for the crucifixion of Jesus on his audience, but argued that God counteracted the deed with the raising of Jesus from death. This balance is seen in later sermons in Acts (see 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:28-30).

The distinction between human decision and the purposes of God is maintained throughout Peter's address. Jesus was a man " accredited by God" by miracles he performed among them. They saw the deeds, knew that they were from God, and still they, " with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross." There was no escaping the responsibility. Some in this audience probably were present on the day the crowd was shouting " Crucify him!" Blame should go to the Jews who were in a position to prevent this injustice, but also to the " wicked men" who helped in the crucifixion (i.e., the Romans).

God was not caught by surprise in all of this. Peter insisted that while Christ was crucified by human hands, he was " handed over" to them by " God's set purpose." The crucifixion was also God's decision. His decision predated that of the Jews and Romans. While they had intended to do away with Jesus in the crucifixion, God foiled their plans by raising him from death.

The language used to describe the liberation of Jesus from death is vivid here. In raising Jesus from the dead, God freed him " from the agony of death" (2:24). The term for " agony" is wjdivn (―odin ) and usually speaks of the pain of childbirth. Death is thus portrayed as a fearful infliction of misery which attempted to " keep its hold on" Jesus. From death's unwelcome clutches Jesus was released since God's power could not be resisted.

Turning to the Psalms, Peter established the point from Scripture. Reproducing the Septuagint version of Psalm 16:8-11, he began by noting David's authorship and the fact that he could not have been speaking of himself. The Psalm was originally an expression of David's confidence in escaping " the grave" (a/{dh", hadçs). The term is not to be confused with the word for " hell."

Jesus the Lord and Messiah (2:29-36)

²⁹" Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. ³⁰ But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. ³¹ Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, ^a that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. ³² God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. ³³ Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. ³⁴ For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, 'The Lord said to my Lord: " Sit at my right hand ³⁵ until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." ' ^{b 36} Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

^a 31 Or Messiah. " The Christ" (Greek) and " the Messiah" (Hebrew) both mean " the Anointed One" ; also in verse 36. ^b 35 Psalm 110:1

David's words, Peter contended, must be a reference to the Messiah, the " Holy One" of God. David's own death and burial were a matter of public record. " His tomb is here to this day," undisturbed in Jerusalem, and thus stood as testimony that no resurrection from death had occurred with this most famous of Israel's kings. The Psalm had to refer to the Messiah.

As Peter noted, David's words pointed to " one of his descendants." David had spoken as a prophet inspired by God and one trusting in God's solemn (" on oath" ) promise to place one of his descendants on the throne of Israel after himself. Such Old Testament promises as 2 Samuel 7:12-13 and Psalm 132:11 come to mind. Since no other descendant of David had ever risen from death, this reference must be to the Messiah. If the Scripture foretold that the Messiah would rise from death and the apostles were witnesses to the fact that Jesus rose from death, Jesus must then be the Messiah spoken of by David.

A similar line of reasoning occurs in verses 34-36. This time the Scripture reference Peter used was Psalm 110:1 and David's words again provided the evidence. This Psalm may have been an enthronement Psalm used in connection with the king of Israel. It is used often in the New Testament (see 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 1:13; 10:13). Peter called attention to the fact that once again David described someone other than himself-someone invited by the Lord to sit at the right hand of the heavenly throne. Peter's interpretation of Psalm 110:1 was " the Lord God" said to " my Lord" (the Messiah), " sit at my right hand." This invitation to sit at God's right hand could not have applied to David because he " did not ascend to heaven." But the apostles had seen one raised from death and taken up to heaven.

Scripture and eyewitness testimony were, then, the foundation of Peter's proclamation. The Old Testament prophecies described what the Messiah would accomplish. The apostles saw with their own eyes how Jesus fulfilled these expectations in his resurrection. Though Peter's audience was not present to witness the resurrection of Jesus, they had been given the privilege of seeing some of its results. " The promised Holy Spirit" had been given to Jesus and he had " poured out" the visible effects of the Spirit's presence.

On this basis Peter proclaimed Jesus as " both Lord and Christ." Directing his remarks to his Jerusalem audience, he reminded them that they were guilty of rejecting the very one God had set forth as Messiah. Jesus was " Lord" (kuvrio", kyrios ) in the same sense that the Old Testament (Septuagint) used the term of the only living God. Jesus was " Messiah" in the sense that he was anointed by God for the purpose of saving people from their sins.

This Lord and Christ is the one Peter urged his audience to confess. Thus the early church did not " just preach what Jesus preached." The church " preached Jesus himself," and that to him belongs our allegiance.

4. The Call to Repentance (2:37-40)

³⁷ When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, " Brothers, what shall we do?" ³⁸ Peter replied, " Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ³⁹ The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off-for all whom the Lord our God will call." ⁴⁰ With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, " Save yourselves from this corrupt generation."

The reaction of the crowd was swift and obvious. They were " cut to the heart." The rare term katanuvssomai ( katanyssomai ) describes a piercing, or a stinging pain. Peter's charge that his audience bore responsibility for the crucifixion of Christ hit them hard. Their question sought relief from the painful jolt of recognizing how wrong they had been about Jesus. Naturally, they wondered what they could do to rectify this wrong and remove their guilt.

Peter's response presents the very core of the Gospel-the kernel of the Good News. Something can be done about sin and guilt, even guilt as serious as the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Two imperatives are given, " repent and be baptized." The Greek term for repentance (metanoevw, metanoe―o ) carries the idea of turning from sin to God. Repentance incorporates a change of heart about unrighteousness and a desire to be reoriented toward the will of God.

The second imperative is baptism. Peter's response makes both of these actions equally necessary. He said " repent and be baptized" - not " repent or be baptized." During the ministry of John the Baptist, believers participated in " a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3). Now Peter instructed his audience to follow a similar course, except this baptism would be " in the name of Jesus Christ." They would be baptized now as a response of allegiance to the risen Lord. This repentance and baptism would also bring forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

A number of commentators seek to diminish the force of the phrase " for the forgiveness of sins" at this point, apparently seeking to safeguard the doctrine of salvation by grace. They take the preposition " for" (eij", eis ) to mean " because of" rather than " in order to." Peter, they say, meant be baptized because of the forgiveness of sins, implying that such forgiveness had already been granted by the time baptism was administered.

This position disregards the very common use of eis in the New Testament to mean " for the purpose of, in order to." In Matthew 26:28 where this exact phrase appears, Jesus says his blood is poured out" for ( eis ) the forgiveness of sins. It would be absurd to argue that the phrase means " because of" and that Jesus' blood was poured out because sins had already been forgiven. Beyond this, the command to be baptized is only one of the imperatives Peter gave. " Be baptized" is joined to " repent" with " and." Whatever Peter says about the forgiveness of sins follows from both imperatives. Just as repentance is needed " for the purpose of" the forgiveness of sins, so is baptism. This position need not rob the plan of salvation of its basis in the grace of God. Both imperatives expect action to be taken on the part of the sinner. Yet Peter considered neither to be a work which merits salvation, but merely the response of faith dictated by the prophecy he had already cited-" everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (2:21).

One more distinction which separated this baptism from that of John was the gift of the Holy Spirit. He did not promise " the gifts of the Spirit" to everyone (see 1 Cor 12:1), but " the gift of the Spirit" -that is, the Holy Spirit himself. He also repeated the universal availability of this gift for " you and your children and for all who are far off." The last phrase even embodies Gentiles.

5. The First Christian Church (2:41-47)

⁴¹ Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day. ⁴² They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. ⁴³ Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. ⁴⁴ All the believers were together and had everything in common. ⁴⁵ Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. ⁴⁶ Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, ⁴⁷ praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Beginning with 3000 conversions, the apostles founded a permanent fellowship of believers in Jerusalem. The language of these verses emphasizes the continuing nature of this fellowship. " They devoted themselves to" all of the defining elements of Christian living. They " continued to meet together" daily, even enjoying their meals at home in a spirit of oneness.

" The apostles' teaching" provided the foundation of their faith. As is evident in the New Testament documents, this teaching was always Christ-centered, yet relevant to life. " The fellowship" (koinwniva, koinônia) should be connected with the following activities which describe believers in their life together. It probably includes the idea of sharing one's resources with others. These believers felt a closeness which extended even to their personal possessions. Many of them sold property so that they had money to share with needy believers.

Included in their oneness were the spiritual activities of the Lord's Supper and prayer. " Breaking of bread" in v. 42 probably refers to the observance of communion in congregational worship. This conclusion seems likely because of its association with the other elements mentioned. The last element is given in its plural form in the Greek text. They devoted themselves to " the prayers." Since the believers continued to make the temple central to their gatherings, it is not surprising that they continued to recognize the times for prayer.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: Act 2:25-28

25-28. There are two points in this announcement which required proof, and to the presentation of this Peter immediately proceeds. Having stated that Jesus was delivered according to the determined purpose of God, he now quotes that purpose as expressed by David in the 16th Psalm Ps 16:8-11>. (25) " For David says concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face; for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved. (26) Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad. Moreover, my flesh shall rest in hope; (27) because thou wilt not leave my soul in hades, neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. (28) Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou wilt make me full of joy with thy countenance. " Only so much of this quotation as refers to the resurrection suits the special purpose of the speaker, the preceding portion serving only to connectedly introduce it.

The words, "Thou shalt make known to me the ways of life," constitute the affirmative assertion of a restoration to life, which had been negatively expressed, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hades, neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption" The words "Thou wilt make me full of joy with thy countenance," no doubt refer to that joy set before Jesus, for which "he endured the cross, despising the shame, and is now set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

It is commonly agreed among interpreters, that in the sentence, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hades, neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption," there is no distinction intended between the condition of the soul and that of the body; but that the whole is merely equivalent to the statement, Thou wilt not leave me among the dead. I am constrained, however, to adopt the opinion advanced, but not defended, by Olshausen, that the apostle does intend to fix our attention upon the body and soul of Jesus separately. The most obvious reason for this opinion is the fact that his body and soul are spoken of separately, and with separate reference to their respective places of abode during the period of death. The soul can not see corruption, neither can the body go into hades; but when men die, ordinarily, their bodies see corruption, and their souls enter, not the grave, but hades. The words in question declare, in reference to both the body and soul of Jesus, that which must have occurred in his resurrection, that the one was not left in hades, neither did the other see corruption. The apostle, in commenting upon them, makes the distinction still more marked, by saying, (verse 31 A31>, below), "He spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul should not be left in hades, nor his flesh see corruption." Why do both the prophet and the apostle so carefully make the distinction, unless they wish to fix attention upon it?

The term hades designates the place of disembodied spirits. It is, as its etymology indicates, (a, privative; idein, to see) the unseen. The Greeks were good at giving names to things. When they watched a friend sinking into the arms of death, they could see, by the motion of the frame and the light of the eye, the continued presence of the soul, until at last, the muscles were all motionless, and the eye fixed and leaden. They could still see the body, and after it had been deposited in the grave they could revisit it and see it again. But where is the soul? You see it no longer. There are no signs of its presence. It is gone; and its invisible abode they call hades, the unseen. That the soul of Jesus entered hades is undeniable. That it returned again to the body at the resurrection is asserted by Peter; and it is this return which was predicted by the prophet, and which caused the exultation both of himself and the apostle.

The resurrection of Jesus is not appreciated by the religious world now, as it was by the apostles. As respects the return of his soul from hades, Protestant writers have fled so far from the justly-abhorred purgatory of the Catholic, and the gloomy soul-sleeping of the Materialist, that they have passed beyond the Scripture doctrine, and either ignore altogether the existence of an intermediate state, or deny that the souls of the righteous are short of ultimate happiness during this period. On the other hand, they have so great a tendency to absolute spiritualism in their conceptions of the future state, that they fail to appreciate the necessity for the resurrection of the body of Jesus, or to exult, as the apostles did, in anticipation of the resurrection of their own bodies. As long as men entertain the idea that their spirits enter into final bliss and glory immediately after death, they can never be made to regard the resurrection of the body as a matter of importance. This idea has been produced a general skepticism among the masses, in reference to a resurrection of the body; for men are very apt to doubt the certainty of future events for which they see no necessity. As respects the resurrection of the body of Jesus, the most popular conception of its necessity is no doubt this, that it was merely to comply with the predictions of the prophets and of Jesus himself. It would be far more rational to suppose that it was made a subject of prophesy, because there was some grand necessity that it should occur.

It would occupy too much space, in a work of this kind, to fully develop this subject, we must, therefore, content ourselves with only a few observations, the complete vindication of the correctness of which we must forego.

When the eternal Word became flesh, he assumed all the limitations and dependencies which belong to men; "for it behooved him to be made in all things like his brethren." One of these limitations was the inability to work without a body; hence, to him, as well as to his brethren, there was a night coming in which he could not work. He says, "I must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; the night is coming when no man can work." This night can not be the period after the resurrection, for then he did work. It must, then, be the period of death, while his soul was absent from his body. During this period, he himself asserts, he could do no work, and certainly neither history nor prophesy refer to any work which he then did. It was the Jewish Sabbath among the living, and he observed it with absolute stillness in hades. If he had appeared to his disciples, as angels appear to men, convincing them that he was still alive, and could then have gone to heaven in his mere spiritual nature, who could say there was any necessity for a resurrection of that body in which all his sufferings were endured, and through which all temptations had reached him? But he could not be. Hades was to him a night of inactivity, as it is to all his disciples, though to neither is it a state of unconsciousness. If it had continued forever, then the further work of redemption, which could only be effected by a mediator in heaven, a Christ on the throne, sending down the Holy Spirit, directing the labors of men and angels, and finally raising the dead to judgment, would have remained undone forever. It was this thought which caused the exultation of the apostles, in view of the recovery of his soul from the inactivity of hades, and its reunion with the uncorrupted and now incorruptible body. "He was delivered for our offenses," but "was raised again for our justification." His death was the atonement, enabling God to be just in justifying those who believe on Jesus; but his resurrection enabled him to enter heaven with his own blood, securing eternal redemption for us. The resurrection was, therefore, an imperious necessity in his case, and it will be in ours; for not till he comes again will we enter the mansions he is preparing for us, and receive the crown of righteousness which he will give to all them, who love his appearing.

McGarvey: Act 2:29-31

29-31. Having exhibited, in the quotation from David, "the determined purpose, and foreknowledge of God," in reference to the resurrection of Jesus, the apostle, never overlooking the logical necessities of his argument, next considers the only objection which his hearers would likely to urge against his prophetic proof. In the words quoted, David speaks in the first person, and this might lead some to object, that he was speaking of himself, and not of the Messiah. If, however, it be proved that he did not speak of himself, they would readily admit that he spoke in the name of the Christ. Peter proves this, in these words: (29) " Brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. (30) Being a prophet, then, and knowing that God had sworn to him, that from the fruit of his loins he would raise up the Christ, according to the flesh, to sit on his throne; (31) foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that his soul was not left in hades, neither did his flesh see corruption. " David's own flesh having seen corruption, as they themselves admitted, and his soul being still in hades, there was no alternative but to admit that he spoke of the Messiah. This brief argument not only refuted the supposed objection, but opened the minds of his hearers, to an entirely new conception of the prophetic throne of David, and of the Messiah, who was to occupy it; showing, that instead of being the ruler of an earthly kingdom, however, glorious, he was to sit upon the throne of the whole universe.

McGarvey: Act 2:32-33

32, 33. Thus far in his argument, the speaker has proved that the Messiah must rise from the dead to ascend his throne; but he has yet to prove that Jesus was thus raised, and was, therefore, the Messiah of whom David had spoken. He proves the resurrection by the testimony of himself and the eleven other witnesses standing with him: (32) " This Jesus has God raised up, of which we are all witnesses. " Here the twelve unimpeached witnesses testifying to a sensible fact, and presenting their testimony with all the authority belonging to miraculously attested messengers from God. This was sufficient, as to the resurrection. But it must also be proved that after he arose he ascended to heaven and sat down upon his throne. It would be unavailing, for this purpose, to urge the fact that the twelve had seen him ascend; for their eyes had followed him no further than the cloud which received him out of sight. But he presents, in proof, this immersion in the Holy Spirit, which the multitude were witnessing, and which could be effected by no one beneath the throne of God. (33) " Therefore, being to the right hand of God exalted, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has shed forth this which you now see and hear. " What they then saw and heard was both the proof that he who sent it down had ascended the throne of heaven, and the assurance that Peter spoke by divine authority in declaring this fact.

McGarvey: Act 2:34-35

34, 35. One more point established, not so much in proof of the exaltation of Christ, as to show that it also was a subject of prophesy, and this inimitable argument will be complete. (34) " For David has not ascended into the heavens, but he himself says, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, (35) until I make thy foes thy footstool. " The Pharisees themselves admitted that in this passage David referred to the Messiah, and had been much puzzled by the admission in a memorable conversation with Jesus; but Peter, unwilling to take any thing as granted, which might afterward be made a ground of objection, carefully guards the application, as he had done that of the previous quotation by David, by the remark that David himself had not ascended to heaven; hence, he could not, in these words, be speaking of himself. This admitted, it must be granted that he spoke of the Messiah, for certainly David would call no other his Lord.

McGarvey: Act 2:36

36. The progressive advances of his argument being now complete, those of them which needed proof being sustained by conclusive evidence, and the remainder consisting in facts well known to his audience, he announces his final conclusion in these bold and confident terms: (36) " Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus whom you have crucified both Lord and Christ. "

McGarvey: Act 2:37

37. It has already been observed, that up to the moment in which Peter arose to address the audience, although the immersion in the Holy Spirit had occurred, and its effects had been fully witnessed by the people, no change had taken place in their minds in reference to Jesus Christ, neither did they experience any emotion, except confusion and amazement at a phenomenon which they could not comprehend. This fact proves, conclusively, that there was no power in the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit, which they witnesses, in itself alone, to produce in them the desired change. All the power which belonged to this event must have come short of the desired effect, but for a medium distinct from itself, through which it reached the minds and hearts of the people. The medium was the words of Peter. He spoke; and when he had announced the conclusion of his argument, Luke says: (37) " Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the other apostles, Brethren, what shall we do? " In this exclamation there is a manifest confession that they believe what Peter has preached to them; and Luke's declaration that they were pierced to the heart shows that they felt intensely the power of the facts which they now believed. Since Peter began to speak, therefore, a change has taken place both in their convictions and their feelings. They are convinced that Jesus is the Christ, and they are pierced to the heart with anguish at the thought of having murdered him. In the mean time, not a word is said of any influence at work upon them, except that of the words spoken by Peter; hence we conclude that the change in their minds and hearts has been effected through those words. This conclusion was also drawn by Luke himself; for in saying, "when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and cried out," he evidently attributes their emotion and their outcry to what they heard, as the cause of both.

If Luke had regarded the change effected as one which could be produced only by the direct agency of the Holy Spirit, he could not have expressed himself in these words, for his language not only entirely ignores such an influence, but attributes the effect to a different instrumentality. We understand him, therefore, to teach that the whole change thus far effected in these men was produced through the word of truth which they heard from Peter.

Let it be observed, however, that what they had heard concerning Christ, they had heard not as the words of the mere man Peter; for, previous to introducing the name of Jesus, he had clearly demonstrated the inspiration of himself and the other apostles. This being established beyond the possibility of rational doubt, from the moment that he began to speak of Jesus they were listening to him as an inspired man. But the Jews had long since learned to ascribe to the words of inspired men all the authority of the Spirit who spoke through them; hence this audience realized that all the power to convince and to move, that the authority of God himself could impart to words, belonged to the words of Peter. If they could believe God, they must believe the oracles of God which find utterance through Peter's lips. They do believe, and they believe because the words they hear are recognized as the words of God. Faith, then, comes by hearing the word of God; and he who hears the admitted word of God, must believe, or deny that God speaks the truth. This is true, whether the word is heard from the lips of the inspired men who originally gave it utterance, or is received through other authentic channels. The power by which the word of God produces faith is all derived from the fact that it is the word of God.

No words, whether of men or of God, can effect moral changes in the feelings of the hearer, unless they are believed; nor can they when believed, unless they announce truths or facts calculated to produce such change. In the present instance, the facts announced placed the hearers in the awful attitude of the murderers of the Son of God, who was now not only alive again, but seated on the throne of God, with all power in his hands, both on earth and in heaven. The belief of these facts necessarily filled them with the most intense realization of guilt, and the most fearful anticipation of punishment. The former of these emotions is expressed by the words of Luke, "They were pierced to the heart ;" the latter, in their own words, "Brethren, what shall we do? " They had just heard Peter, in the language of Joel, speak of a possible salvation; and the question, What shall we do? unquestionably means, What shall we do to be saved?

McGarvey: Act 2:38

38. This is the first time, under the reign of Jesus Christ, that this most important of all questions was ever propounded; and the first time, of course, that it was every answered. Whatever may have been the true answer under any previous dispensation, or on any previous day in the world's history, the answer given by Peter on this day of Pentecost, in which the reign of Christ on earth began, is the true and infallible answer for all the subjects of his authority in all subsequent time. It deserves our most profound attention; for it announces the conditions of pardon for all men who may be found in the same state of mind with these inquiries. It is expressed as follows: (38) " Then Peter said to them, Repent and be immersed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "

That the offer of pardon, made to the world through Jesus Christ, is conditional, is denied only by the fatalist. We will not argue this point, expect as it is involved in the inquiry as to what the conditions of pardon are. When we ascertain the prescribed conditions of pardon, both questions will be settled in settling one.

Pardon is the chief want of the human soul, in its most favorable earthly circumstances. The rebel against God's government, though he lay down his arms and becomes a loyal subject, can have no hope of happiness without pardon for the past; while the pardoned penitent, humbly struggling in the service of God, knows himself still guilty of shortcomings, by which he must fail of the final reward, unless pardoned again and again. The question as to what are the conditions of pardon, therefore, necessarily divides itself into two; one having reference to the hitherto-unpardoned sinner, the other to the saint who may have fallen into sin. It is the former class who propounded the question to Peter, and it is to them alone that the answer under consideration was given. We will confine ourselves, in our present remarks, to this branch of the subject, and discuss it only in the light of the passage before us.

If we regard the question of the multitude, What shall we do? as simply a question of duty under their peculiar circumstances, without special reference to final results, we learn from the answer that there were two things for them to do- Repent, and be immersed. If Peter had stopped with these two words, his answer would have been satisfactory, in this view of the subject, and it would have been the conclusion of the world, that the duty of a sinner, "pierced to the heart" by a sense of guilt, is to repent and be immersed.

But if we regard their question as having definite reference to the salvation of which Peter had already spoken, (verse 21 Ac 2:21>,) and their meaning, What shall we do to be saved? then the answer is equally definite: it teaches that what a sinner thus affected is to do to be saved, is to repent and be immersed.

From these two observations, the reader perceives, that so far as the conditions of salvation from past sins are concerned, the duty of the sinner is most definitely taught by the first two words of the answer, taken in connection with their question, without entering upon the controversy concerning the remainder of the answer. If it had been Peter's design merely to give an answer in concise terms, without explanation, no doubt he would have confined it to these two words, for they contain the only commands which he gives.

But he saw fit to accompany the two commands with suitable explanations. He qualifies the command to be immersed by the clause, "in the name of Jesus Christ," to show that it is under his authority that they were to be immersed, and not merely under that of the Father, whose authority alone was recognized in John's immersion. That we are right in referring to this limiting clause, "in the name of Jesus Christ," to the command to be immersed, and not to the command repent, is evident from the fact that it would be incongruous to say, " Repent in the name of Jesus Christ."

Peter further explains the two commands, by stating their specific design; by which term we mean the specific blessing which was to be expected as the consequence of obedience. It is " for the remission of sins. " To convince an unbiased mind that this clause depends upon both the preceding commands, and express their design, it would only be necessary to repeat the words, "Repent and be immersed in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." But, inasmuch as it has suited the purpose of some controversialists to dispute this proposition, we here give the opinions of two recent representative commentators, who can not be suspected of undue bias in its favor.

Dr. Alexander (Presbyterian) says, "The whole phrase, to (or toward) remission of sins, describes this as the end to which the multitude had reference, and which, therefore, must be contemplated in the answer." Again: "The beneficial end to which all this led was the remission of sins. "

Dr. Hackett (Baptist) expresses himself still more satisfactorily: " eis aphesin hamartion, in order to the forgiveness of sins, (Matt 26:28 Luke 3:3 Mt 26:28>,) we connect, naturally, with the both the preceding verbs. This clause states the motive or object which should induce them to repent and be baptized. It enforces the entire exhortation, not one part of it to the exclusion of the other."

The connection contended for can not be made more apparent by argument; it needs only that attention be called to it, in order to be perceived by every unbiased mind. It is possible that some doubt might arise in reference to the connection of the clause with the term repent, but one would imagine that its connection with the command be immersed could not be doubted, but for the fact that it has been disputed. Indeed, some controversialists have felt so great necessity for denying the last-named connection, as to assume that the clause, "for the remission of sins" depends largely upon the term repent, and that the connection of thought is this: "Repent for the remission of sins, and be immersed in the name of Jesus Christ." It is a sufficient refutation of this assumption to remark, that, if Peter had intended to say this, he would most certainly have done so; but he has said something entirely different; and this shows that he meant something entirely different. If men are permitted, after this style, to entirely reconstruct the sentences of inspired apostles, then there is no statement in the Word of God which may not be perverted. We dismiss this baseless assumption with the remark, that it has not been dignified by the indorsement of any writer of respectable attainments, known to the author, and it would not be noticed here, but for the frequency of its appearance in the pulpit, in the columns of denominational newspapers, and on the pages of partisan tracts.

The dependence of the clause, "for the remission of sins," upon both the verbs repent and be immersed, being established, it would seem undeniable that remission of sins is the blessing in order to the enjoyment of which they were commanded to repent and be immersed. This is universally admitted so far as the term repent is concerned, but by many denied in reference to the command be immersed; hence the proposition that immersion is for the remission of sins is rejected by the Protestant sects in general. Assuming that remission of sins precedes immersion, and that, so far as adults are concerned, the only proper subjects for this ordinance are those whose sins are already pardoned, it is urged that for in this clause means " on account of " or " because of. " Hence, Peter is understood to command, "Repent and be immersed on account of remission of sins already enjoyed. " But this interpretation is subject to two insuperable objections. 1st. To command men to repent and be immersed because their sins were already remitted, is to require them not only to be immersed on this account, but to repent because they were already pardoned. There is no possibility of extricating the interpretation from this absurdity. 2d. It contradicts an obvious fact of the case. It makes Peter command the inquirers to be immersed because their sins were already remitted, whereas it is an indisputable fact that their sins were not yet remitted. On the contrary, they were still pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt, and by the question they propounded were seeking how they might obtain the very pardon which this interpretation assumes that they already enjoyed. Certainly no sane man would assume a position involving such absurdity, and so contradictory to an obvious fact, were he not driven to it by the inexorable demands of a theory which could not be otherwise sustained.

We observe, further, in reference to this interpretation, that even if we admit the propriety of supplanting the preposition for by the phrase on account of, the substitute will not answer the purpose for which it is employed. The meaning of this phrase varies, according as its object is past or future. " On account of " some past event may mean because it has taken place; but on account of an event yet in the future, would, in the same connection, mean in order that it might take place. The same is true of the equivalent phrase, "because of." If, then, the parties addressed by Peter were already pardoned, " on account of the remission of sins" would mean, because their sins had been remitted. But as this is an indisputable fact that the parties addressed were yet unpardoned, what they are commanded to do on account of remission of sins must mean, in order that their sins may be remitted. Such a rendering, therefore, would not even render the obvious meaning of the passage less perspicuous than it already is.

It will be found that any other substitute for the preposition for, designed to force upon the passage a meaning different from that which it obviously bears, will as signally fail to suit the purpose of its author. If, with Dr. Alexander, we render, Repent and be immersed " to (or toward) remission of sins," we still have remission both beyond repentance and immersion, and depending upon them as preparatory conditions. Indeed, this rendering would leave it uncertain whether repentance and immersion would bring them to remission of sins, or only toward it, leaving an indefinite space yet to pass before obtaining it.

If, with others still-for every effort that ingenuity could suggest has been made to find another meaning for this passage-we render it, Repent and be immersed unto or into remission of sins, the attempt is fruitless; for remission of sins is still the blessing unto which or into which repentance and immersion are to lead the inquirers.

Sometimes the advocates of these various renderings, when disheartened by the failure of their attempts at argument and criticism, resort to raillery, and assert that the whole doctrine of immersion for the remission of sins depends upon the one little word for in the command, "be immersed for the remission of sins." If this were true, it would be no humiliation; for a doctrine based upon a word of God, however small, has an eternal and immutable foundation. But it is not true. On the contrary, you may draw a pencil-mark over the whole clause, "for the remission of sins," erasing it, with all the remainder of Peter's answer, and still the meaning will remain unchanged. The connection would then read thus: "Brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said to them, Repent, and be immersed every one of you in the name of the Lord Jesus." Remembering now that these parties were pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt, and that their question means, What shall we do to be saved from out sins? the answer must be understood as the answer to that question. But the answer is, Repent and be immersed; therefore, to repent and to be immersed are the two things which they must do in order to be saved from their sins.

The reader now perceives, that, in this first announcement to sinners of the terms of pardon, so guardedly has Peter expressed himself, and so skillfully has Luke interwoven with his words the historic facts, that whatever rendering men have forced upon the leading term, the meaning of the whole remains unchanged; and even when you strike this term and its dependent words out of the text, that same meaning still stares you in the face. The fact is suggestive of more than human wisdom. It reminds us that Peter spoke, and Luke wrote, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. That infinite wisdom which was dictating a record for all time to come is displayed here, providing for future controversies which no human being could anticipate. Like the sun in the heavens, which may be temporarily obscured by clouds, but will still break forth again, and shine upon all but those who hide from his beams, the light of truth which God has suspended in this passage may be dimmed for a moment by the mists of partisan criticism, but to those who are willing to see it, it will still send out its beams, and guide the trembling sinner unerringly to pardon and peace.

If there were any real ground for doubt as to the proper translation and real meaning of the words eis aphesin hamartion, for the remission of sins, when connected with the term immersion, a candid inquirer would resort to its usage when disconnected from this term, and seek thus to determine its exact import. It happens to occur only once in connection suitable to this purpose, but no number of occurrences could more definitely fix its meaning. When instituting the supper, Jesus says, "This is my blood of the new covenant, shed for many for the remission of sins, " eis aphesin hamartion. It is impossible to doubt that the clause here means in order to the remission of sins. In this case it expresses the object for which something is to be done; in the passage we are discussing, it expresses the object for which something is commanded to be done: the grammatical and logical construction is the same in both cases, and, therefore, the meaning is the same. Men are to repent and be immersed in order to the attainment of the same blessing for which the blood of Jesus was shed. The propitiation through his blood was in order to the offer of pardon, while repentance and immersion are enjoined by Peter upon his hearers, in order to the attainment of pardon.

The careful reader will have observed that in stating the conditions of remission of sins to the multitude, Peter says nothing about the necessity of faith. This omission is not sufficiently accounted for by the fact that faith is implied in the command to repent and be immersed; for the parties now addressed were listening to the terms for the first time, and might fail to perceive this implication. But the fact is, that they did already believe, and it was a result of their faith, that they were pierced to the heart, and made to cry out, What shall we do? This Peter perceived, and therefore it would have been but little less than mockery to command them to believe. It will be observed, throughout the course of apostolic preaching, that they never commanded men to do what they had already done, but took them as they found them, and enjoined upon them only that which they yet lacked of complete obedience. In the case before us, Peter was not laying down a complete formula for the conditions of pardon; but was simply informing the parties before him what they must do in order to the remission of their sins. Being believers already, they must add to their faith repentance and immersion.

Before dismissing this topic, we must remark that the doctrine of immersion for the remission of sins does not assume that immersion is the only condition of remission, but simply that, it is one among three conditions, and the last of the three. Administered previous to faith and repentance, as in the case of infants, it is not only absolutely worthless, but intensely sinful.

The exact meaning of the term repent will be considered below, under iii. 19.

After commanding the inquirers to repent and be immersed for the remission of sins, Peter adds the promise, "and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." The gift of the Holy Spirit should not be confounded with the Holy Spirit's gifts, nor with the fruits of the Spirit. The fruits of the Holy Spirit are religious traits of character, and they result from the gift of the Holy Spirit. The latter expression means, the Holy Spirit as a gift. It is analogous to the expression, "promise of the Holy Spirit" in verse 33 Ac 2:33>, above, where Peter says, "having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has shed forth this which you now see and hear." The gifts of the Holy Spirit were various miraculous powers, intellectual and physical. These were conferred only upon a few individuals, while the gift of the Spirit is promised to all who repent and are immersed.

McGarvey: Act 2:39

39. Peter does not limit the promise of the Holy Spirit to his present audience; but adds, (39) " For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. " That we are right in referring the word promise, in this sentence, to the promise of the Holy Spirit just made by Peter, is evident from the fact that this is the only promise made in the immediate context.

Some pedobaptist commentators have affected to find in the words, "The promise is to you and your children, " a show of authority for infant membership in the Church of Christ. But Mr. Barnes, though of that school himself, has the candor to say of this expression, "It does not refer to children as children, and should not be adduced to establish the propriety of infant baptism, or as applicable particularly to infants. It is a promise, indeed, to parents, that the blessings of salvation shall not be confined to parents, but shall be extended also to their posterity." That this is the true conception of the apostle's meaning is demonstrated by the fact that the promise in question is based upon the conditions of repentance and immersion, with which infants could not possibly comply.

The extension of this promise "to all who are afar off," is not to be limited to all the Jews who were afar off; but it is properly qualified by the additional words, "even as many as the Lord our God shall call." It included, therefore, every individual who should, at any future time, be a subject of the gospel call, and guarantees to us, of the present generation, the gift of the Holy Spirit upon the same terms on which it was offered to Peter's hearers on the day of Pentecost.

McGarvey: Act 2:40

40. The historian had now concluded his report of Peter's discourse, but informs us that he has given only an epitome of it. (40) " And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. " The term testify refers to the argumentative portion of his discourse; and the term exhort to the horatory portion. The latter naturally and logically followed his statement of the conditions of pardon, and the substance of it is compressed by Luke into the words, " Save yourselves from this untoward generation." The command to save themselves must sound quite strange in the ears of such modern theorists as affirm that men have no ability to do, or say, or think any thing tending to their own salvation. But this only shows how far they have departed from apostolic speech and thought. Peter had proposed conditions of pardon which they could comply with, and now their salvation depended upon their compliance with these conditions. When they complied with them, they saved themselves. To be saved from that untoward generation was not, as the conceit of Universalists would have it, to escape the siege of Jerusalem; for the great mass of them escaped that, by dying a natural death before it took place. It was to escape the fate which the mass of that generation were destined to meet in eternity, on account of their sins. We will more fully discuss the exact import of their term saved in this and similar connections under verse 47 A47>, below.

McGarvey: Act 2:41

41. The multitude, who had been so pierced to the heart by Peter's discourse, as to cry out, "Brethren, what shall we do?" were happily surprised to find the terms of pardon so easy. (41) " Then they gladly received his word, and were immersed; and the same day there were added about three thousand souls. " The pronoun they identifies the parties immersed with those who had cried out, What shall we do? It shows that they promptly complied with the command which Peter had given them. The word which they gladly received can not be the main part of Peter's speech, for this had pierced them to the heart; but it is the word of his answer, which gave their feelings great relief by opening to them so easy a method of escape from the doom which they dreaded, and which they so richly deserved.

Times without number the objection has been urged, and as often refuted, that three thousand men could not have been immersed in so short a time, and with the inadequate supply of water afforded in Jerusalem. As to the quantity of available water, Dr. J. T. Barclay, in his work entitled "The City of the Great King," written during a residence of three years and a half in Jerusalem, as a missionary, shows that Jerusalem was anciently better supplied with water than any other city known to history not permeated by living streams. Even to the present day, though most of the public reservoirs are now dry, such as the supposed pool of Bethesda, 365 feet long by 131 in breadth, and the lower pool of Gihon, 600 long by 260 in breadth, there are still in existence bodies of water, such as the pool of Siloam, and the pool of Hezekiah, affording most ample facilities for immersing any number of persons.

As to the want of time for the immersion of so many, any one who will make the mathematical calculation, without which it is folly to offer the objection, will find that there was the greatest abundance of time. Allowing that Peter's speech commenced at nine o'clock, as he himself states in verse 15 Ac 2:15>, and that the exercises at the temple closed at noon, we have left six hours till sunset. To immerse sixty men in an hour would be very deliberate work for one administrator. But there were twelve administrators, hence, each hour there were not less than seven hundred and twenty persons immersed. At this rate, in less than four and one-fourth hours the whole multitude would be immersed, leaving the sun nearly two hours high when the last candidate emerged from the water. In view of this simple calculation, which a child could make, it is truly astonishing that so many grave critics and preachers should urge this objection. It strikingly illustrates the blinding effects of partisan zeal.

Now that the three thousand are added to the Church, we may glance back over the history of the day, and learn upon what preparation they were received to the fellowship of the disciples. To accomplish this, we must first consider their state of mind before Peter spoke to them, and then observe the changes through which they passed. Being Jews, then, they were already believers in the true God, and in the inspiration of the Old Testament scriptures. Luke declares, also, that they were "devout men." They were, however, unbelievers in reference to Jesus Christ, and they were guilty of participating in his crucifixion. At the moment that Peter arose to speak, they were full of amazement at witnessing the immersion of the twelve in the Holy Spirit, but their religious character remained unchanged. Peter speaks; and, at the conclusion of his argument, there is an evident change in their convictions. But they believe now nothing additional to what they did at first, except what Peter has proved to them. He has attempted to prove, however, only two propositions: first, That he and the eleven were inspired; second, That Jesus of Nazareth was now both Lord and Christ. The first, moreover, was established only as a means of proving the second. Several other subordinate facts were also proved for the same purpose, so that the whole speech is properly resolved into an attempt to prove the single proposition with which it concludes, that "God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ." This, then, is what the three thousand believed, and this is all that distinguished their faith when immersed, from what it was before they heard the gospel from Peter's lips.

But another change had occurred within them. Under the influence of their new faith, they were pierced to the heart with a sense of guilt. This is the "godly sorrow" which "works repentance," and it prepared them to promptly obey Peter's command, "Repent, and be immersed." They repented, and were immersed. Their conversion, therefore, consisted in believing that Jesus is the Christ, repenting of their sins, and being immersed. This entitled them to membership in the Church, and so it does every human being who does likewise.

McGarvey: Act 2:42

42. Having been immersed simply upon their faith in Jesus Christ, these young disciples had many subordinate objects of faith to become acquainted with, and many duties yet unknown, in which to be instructed. In giving an account of these matters, Luke is far more brief, adhering strictly to the chief purpose of his narrative, which is to give the process and means of conversion, rather than a history of the edification and instruction of the converted. He closes this section of the history with a brief notice of the order established in the new Church, first describing their order of worship. (42) " And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' teaching, and in fellowship, and in breaking the loaf, and in prayers. "

The apostles were as yet the only teachers of the Church, and in this work they were executing the second part of their commission, which required them to teach those whom they immersed all things that Jesus had commanded. The same command which made it their duty to teach, made it also the duty of the disciples to learn from them, and to abide by their instruction. This duty the first disciples faithfully complied with, though it has been grievously neglected by their brethren of later ages.

For the purpose of being taught by the apostles, they must have assembled together, and this was the occasion for manifesting their fellowship, which term expresses their common participation in religious privileges. It has been urged by some writers, that the term koinonia should here be rendered contribution, instead of fellowship, and that it refers to contributions which were regularly made in the public assemblies, for the poor. That the term is used in this limited sense in at least two places in the New Testament, must be admitted, viz.: in Rom 15:26 Ro 15:26>, "It hath pleased them of Macedonia to make a certain contribution for the poor of the saints in Jerusalem;" and in 2 Cor 9:13 2Co 9:13>, where Paul says the saints "glorify God for your liberal contribution to them and to all men." But such is not, by any means, its common usage. It usually occurs in such connections as the following: "You were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ." "The favor of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you." "And truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." "We have fellowship with one another."

The radical idea in this term is that of participation in common. We have fellowship with God, because we are made partakers of the divine nature, as we escape the corruption which is in the world through lust. We have fellowship with the Son, because of the common sympathies which his life and sufferings have established between himself and us; and with the Spirit, because we partake of the strengthening and enlightening influences of his teachings, and because he dwells in us. We have fellowship with one another, because of the mutual participation in each other's affection and good offices. The term is also used in reference to the Lord's supper. "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the fellowship of the blood of Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not the fellowship of the body of Christ?" We partake in common of the benefits of his broken body and shed blood, which are symbolized in the cup and the loaf.

From the meaning of the term, as thus exemplified, originates its use in the sense of contribution; for in the act of contributing to the necessities of others, we allow them to participate in the blessings which we enjoy. We are not authorized, however, by the rules of criticism, to give it this limited signification, except where the context clearly requires it. Seeing that Christians enjoy fellowship with so many sources of happiness, the term unrestricted must embrace them all. In the present instance the context imposes no limitation upon its meaning, and it would be quite arbitrary to restrict it to the sense of contribution. The use of the article before koinonia can not be pleaded as a ground for such restriction; for it only indicates the notoriety of that which the term designates. Still, the idea of contributing to the wants of poor brethren is involved in the fellowship of Christians, and by the statement that they continued steadfastly in the fellowship, we understand that they continued in the common participation of religious enjoyments, including contributions for the poor. Whether these contributions were made at every meeting or not, we are not informed; but they were certainly made when circumstances required.

Together with the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, Luke enumerates "breaking the loaf and prayers," as part of the exercises in which the disciples continued. The frequency with which the loaf was broken is not intimated here. It will be discussed under chapter xx. 7 . This brief statement shows merely that this institution, according to the Savior's command, was observed from the very beginning of the Church.

The prayers mentioned are those there were offered in public. The number of prayers offered on any occasion, or the order in which the prayers, the instruction, breaking the loaf, and the other acts of fellowship followed each other, is not intimated. Luke's silence in reference to these particulars may have arisen from the fact that there was no invariable order of exercises; or may have been intended to prevent the order in the Jerusalem Church from being regarded as an authoritative precedent. It shows clearly the intention of the Holy Spirit that the assemblies of the saints should be left to the exercise of their own discretion in matters of this kind, and furnishes a most singular rebuke to the hundreds of party leaders who have since attempted to impose authoritative rituals upon the congregations. If the example of the Church in Jerusalem, in this respect, though its exercises were directed by the whole body of the apostles, was not binding upon other Churches, what body of uninspired men shall have the presumption to bind what God has purposely left free?

McGarvey: Act 2:43

43. Next to this brief notice of the exercises of the Church, we have a glance at the effect of the scenes just described, upon the surrounding community. (43) " And fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. " This fear was not that which partakes of aversion, for we learn below, (47) that many were daily added to the Church; but it was that silent awe which miracles naturally inspired, mingled with respectful deference to a people of such holiness.

McGarvey: Act 2:44-45

44, 45. We are next introduced to a striking instance of the fellowship previously mentioned. (44) " Now all who believed were together, and had all things common, (45) and sold their possessions and goods, and distributed them to all, as any one had need. " This was not a community of goods, by which all were placed on a pecuniary level; for distribution was made only as any one had need. It was only such liberality to the poor as should characterize the congregations of the Lord in every age and country. Poor brethren must not be allowed to suffer for the necessaries of life, though it require us to divide with them the last loaf in our possession. "He who has this world's goods and sees his brother have need, and shuts up his compassion from him, how dwells the love of God in him?" We will, hereafter, see that the Church in Jerusalem was not the only one which engaged in this species of benevolence. This conduct was in marked contrast with the neglect of the poor which was then common among the Jews, even in violation of their own law, and which was universal among the Gentiles. Nothing of this kind had ever been seen on earth before. We will refer to the subject again, under iv. 32, below.

McGarvey: Act 2:46-47

46, 47. The further history of the Church, for a short time, is condensed into this brief statement: (46) " And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, received their food with gladness and singleness of heart, (47) praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added those saved every day to the Church. "

Whether the disciples continued to offer sacrifices or not-on which question see Com. xxi. 18-26-that they should "continue daily with one accord in the temple," was most natural. The temple had been, to them and their fathers, for many generations, the house of God and the place of prayer. The apostles had been led to its sacred precincts by the Savior himself, and here it was that the Holy Spirit had come upon them. Their most holy associations were connected with it, and it would have been doing great violence to their feelings to require them at once to abandon it. This natural reverence for the place continued till its destruction by Titus; and even to this day, the hill where the temple once stood has a peculiarly sacred place in the hearts of Christians. The "breaking bread," klontes arton, mentioned in this sentence, is not the "breaking of the loaf," e klasis touartou of verse 42 Ac 2:42>; but refers to common meals of which they partook "from house to house." This is evident from the connection: "breaking bread from house to house, they received their food with gladness and singleness of heart." It was that breaking of bread in which they "received their food," which was not done in partaking of the emblematic loaf. There is no evidence that the emblematic loaf was ever broken in mere social gatherings. It belongs exclusively to the Lord's day.

By the expression "singleness of heart" is meant the concentration of their affections and desires upon a single subject. This devotion and concentration of thought could but result, as it did, in giving the disciples "favor with all the people," and causing daily additions to the Church.

Those added to the Church daily were not "such as should be saved," as rendered in the common version, but tous sozomenous, the saved. In what sense they were saved, is a question of some importance. Dr. Hackett says: "The doctrine is that those who embrace the gospel adopt the infallible means of being saved." This is, undoubtedly, true doctrine; but it is not what is taught in the passage; for Luke speaks not of those who daily embraced the means of salvation, but of those who were saved. The view expressed by Alexander, that "men are said to be saved, not only in reference to the final consummation, but to the inception of the saving work," is a nearer approach to the true conception, but still falls short of it. It is not an inception of the saving work, of which Luke speaks, but the salvation referred to is complete; the parties spoken of being called "the saved. " Both these learned commentators, by keeping their minds fixed upon a future state as offering the only fulfillment of the word " saved, " have failed to discover the exact sense in which it is here used by the historian. Primarily, the term save means simply to make safe. In the religious sense, it means to make safe from the consequences of sin. If men had never sinned, they could not be saved, seeing they would be already safe. But having sinned, they are saved when they are made safe from the consequences of their sins. This is done when their sins are forgiven. At the moment a penitent sinner obtains pardon, he is, so far as the past is concerned, completely saved. It is in this sense that the parties in this case added to the Church are called " the saved. " Paul uses the term in the same sense when he says of God, "According to his mercy he saved us, by the laver of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit."

The fact that the Lord added the saved, or pardoned, to the Church, justifies two conclusions: first, That men are entitled to membership in the Church the moment they are pardoned; second, That men should join the Church, not as a means of obtaining pardon, but because they have already obtained it. The former conclusion shows that it is unscriptural to admit, as some parties do, that certain persons are pardoned, and yet refuse them Church-fellowship. The latter condemns the practice observed by others, of received persons to membership "as a means of grace ;" i. e., as a means of obtaining pardon.

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Act 2:34

ACTS 2:34 —Is David in heaven or not?

PROBLEM: Peter seems to imply here that David was not in heaven. He wrote, “David did not ascend into the heavens.” Yet the Bible indicates that David was one of God’s choice servants ( Acts 13:22 ) who obviously went to be with his Lord when he died (cf. Matt. 22:42-46 ).

SOLUTION: Peter is not speaking of David’s soul here, but of his body. David’s soul is in heaven along with all other believers, but his body is still in the grave ( Acts 2:29 ). Since David’s body has not yet been raised, it is clear that he has not yet “ascended” bodily into heaven either. It is for this same reason that Jesus said to Mary, “I have not yet ascended to My Father” ( John 20:17 ). The day He died, Jesus’ spirit went to be with the Father (see Luke 23:43 , 46 ). So, His spirit had been with the Father, but His body had not yet ascended into heaven when he spoke to Mary. The bodily ascension took place several weeks later (cf. Acts 1:3 , 9-10 ). (See also comments on Eph. 4:9 .)   

Critics Ask: Act 2:38

ACTS 2:38 —Did Peter declare that baptism was necessary for salvation?

PROBLEM: Peter seems to be saying that those who responded had to repent and be baptized before they could receive the Holy Spirit. But this is contrary to the teaching of Paul that baptism is not part of the Gospel ( 1 Cor. 1:17 ) and that we are saved by faith alone ( Rom. 4:4 ; Eph. 2:8-9 ).

SOLUTION: This is resolved when we consider the possible meaning of being baptized “for” the remission of sins in the light of its usage, the whole context, and the rest of Scripture. Consider the following:

First, the word “for” ( eis ) can mean “with a view to” or even “because of.” In this case, water baptism would be because they had been saved, not in order to be saved.

Second, people are saved by receiving God’s word, and Peter’s audience “gladly received his word” before they were baptized ( Acts 2:41 ).

Third, verse 44 speaks of “all who believed” as constituting the early church, not all who were baptized.

Fourth, later, those who believed Peter’s message clearly received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. Peter said, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” ( Acts 10:47 ) Fifth, Paul separates baptism from the Gospel, saying, “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel” ( 1 Cor. 1:17 ). But it is the Gospel which saves us ( Rom. 1:16 ). Therefore, baptism is not part of what saves us.

Sixth, Jesus referred to baptism as a work of righteousness ( Matt. 3:15 ). But the Bible declares clearly it is “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us” ( Titus 3:5 ).

Seventh, not once in the entire Gospel of John, written explicitly so that people could believe and be saved ( John 20:31 ), does it give baptism as part of the condition of salvation. It simply says over and over that people should “believe” and be saved (cf. John 3:16 , 18 , 36 ).

In view of all these factors it seems best to understand Peter’s statement like this: “Repent and be baptized with a view to the forgiveness of sins.” That this view looked backward (to their sins being forgiven after they were saved) is made clear by the context and the rest of Scripture. Believing (or repenting) and being baptized are placed together, since baptism should follow belief. But nowhere does it say, “He who is not baptized will be condemned” (cf. Mark 16:16 ). Yet Jesus said emphatically that “he who does not believe is condemned already” ( John 3:18 ). So neither Peter nor the rest of Scripture makes baptism a condition of salvation.   

Critics Ask: Act 2:44

ACTS 2:44-45 —Did early Christians practice communism?

PROBLEM: Some have inferred from the fact that these early Christians “sold their possessions” and had “all things in common” that they were practicing a form of communism. However, even the Ten Commandments imply the right to private property, forbidding one to “steal” or even “covet” what belongs to another ( Ex. 20:15 , 17 ).

SOLUTION: There are several reasons to believe that this passage does not teach an abiding form of Christian communism or socialism.

First, these passages are not prescriptive, but are simply descriptive. Nowhere does it lay this down as normative. It simply describes what the believers were doing.

Second, so far as the text indicates, the system was only temporary, not a permanent arrangement. They apparently stayed together in Jerusalem, since that is where the Holy Spirit had descended and the first great turning to Christ had occurred. The necessities of living together away from home occasioned this sort of common arrangement.

Third, the communal arrangement was voluntary. There is no indication in the text that this was a compulsory arrangement. It was apparently simply a temporary and voluntary convenience for the furtherance of the Gospel in those early and crucial days of the Christian church.

Fourth, the selling of property and giving of money was onlypartial. The text implies that they sold only extra land and other possessions, not that they sold their only place of residence. After all, they all eventually left Jerusalem, to which they had come for the Feast of Pentecost ( Acts 2:1 ), and went back to their homes which were scattered all over the world (cf. Acts 2:5-13 ).   

Critics Ask: Act 2:45

ACTS 2:44-45 —Did early Christians practice communism?

PROBLEM: Some have inferred from the fact that these early Christians “sold their possessions” and had “all things in common” that they were practicing a form of communism. However, even the Ten Commandments imply the right to private property, forbidding one to “steal” or even “covet” what belongs to another ( Ex. 20:15 , 17 ).

SOLUTION: There are several reasons to believe that this passage does not teach an abiding form of Christian communism or socialism.

First, these passages are not prescriptive, but are simply descriptive. Nowhere does it lay this down as normative. It simply describes what the believers were doing.

Second, so far as the text indicates, the system was only temporary, not a permanent arrangement. They apparently stayed together in Jerusalem, since that is where the Holy Spirit had descended and the first great turning to Christ had occurred. The necessities of living together away from home occasioned this sort of common arrangement.

Third, the communal arrangement was voluntary. There is no indication in the text that this was a compulsory arrangement. It was apparently simply a temporary and voluntary convenience for the furtherance of the Gospel in those early and crucial days of the Christian church.

Fourth, the selling of property and giving of money was onlypartial. The text implies that they sold only extra land and other possessions, not that they sold their only place of residence. After all, they all eventually left Jerusalem, to which they had come for the Feast of Pentecost ( Acts 2:1 ), and went back to their homes which were scattered all over the world (cf. Acts 2:5-13 ).   

Evidence: Act 2:31

Messianic prophecy fulfilled : " For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption" ( Psa 16:10 ). See 1Pe 2:24 footnote.

Evidence: Act 2:37

USING THE LAW IN EVANGELISM

Peter’s audience was composed of " devout men" ( Act 2:2 ) who were gathered at Pentecost to celebrate the giving of God’s Law on Mount Sinai. Even though these were godly Jews, Peter told them that they were " lawless"— that they had violated God’s Law by murdering Jesus ( Act 2:23 ). He drove home that fact by saying, " Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ" ( Act 2:36 ; emphasis added). It was then that they saw that their sin was personal. They were " pricked in their heart" and cried out for help. Only after the Law convicted them of their guilt did Peter tell his hearers the good news of the fine being paid for them in Christ ( Act 2:38 ).

Evidence: Act 2:38

PRINCIPLES OF GROWTH FOR THE NEW AND GROWING CHRISTIAN

Water Baptism—Sprinkle or Immerse?

The Bible says, " Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. .." ( Act 2:38 ). There is no question about whether you should be baptized. The questions are how, when, and by whom?

It would seem clear from Scripture that those who were baptized were fully immersed in water. Here’s one reason why: " John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there" ( Joh 3:23 ). If John were merely sprinkling believers, he would have needed only a cupful of water. Baptism by immersion also pictures our death to sin, burial, and resurrection to new life in Christ. (See Rom 6:4 ; Col 2:12 )

The Philippian jailer and his family were baptized at midnight, the same hour they believed ( Act 16:30-33 ). The Ethiopian eunuch was baptized as soon as he believed ( Act 8:35-37 ), as was Paul ( Act 9:17-18 ). Baptism is a step of obedience, and God blesses our obedience. So what are you waiting for?

Who should baptize you? It is clear from Scripture that other believers had the privilege, but check with your pastor; he may want the honor himself.

For the next principle of growth, see Mar 12:41-44 footnote.

Evidence: Act 2:44

The need for church . " None of us is self-sufficient in our spiritual lives. We need God, and we need each other. A lot of people go to church because they think God takes roll. For them, the important thing is to make sure their name gets checked off every Sunday on the heavenly roster. But that’s not the way it works. Church is not some kind of moral obligation, some habit or tradition that is ‘the right thing to do.’ Church is a place where we worship God, share our faith with the community of believers, build each other up, and get empowered to go out into the world and live out our faith!

" Similarly, some people think of their spiritual life as if they were one person in a telephone booth, talking to God on a private line. They don’t want to be bothered by the demands of ‘organized religion’ and don’t think they need anyone else. ‘Oh yeah, I’m spiritual,’ they say, ‘I just don’t like church.’ To those folks I say: You cannot grow spiritually in isolation." Rich DeVos, Hope From My Heart: Ten Lessons for Life

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

By Way of Introduction

But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal " Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

Luke the Author

It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes ( The Acts of the Apostles , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay’s view may be found in Chapter I of St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen , Chapter XII of Pauline and Other Studies . A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson’s Luke the Historian in the Light of Research , and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of The Acts of the Apostles , Vol. II of The Beginnings of Christianity , edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: The Case for the Tradition by C. W. Emmet, The Case against the Tradition by H. Windisch. The Internal Evidence of Acts is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys The Tradition (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, The Making of Luke--Acts (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a Tendenz writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

The Author of the Gospel Also

The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote " the first treatise ( ton prōton logon ) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Act_1:1.). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.

The Unity of the Acts

There are some scholars who are willing to admit the Lukan authorship of the " we" sections when the author uses " we" and " us" as in chapter 16:10-40; 20:6-28:31. It has been argued that Luke wrote a travel-document or diary for these sections, but that this material was used by the editor or redactor of the whole book. But, unfortunately for that view, the very same style appears in the Acts as a whole and in the Gospel also as Harnack has proven. The man who said " we" and " us" in the " we" sections wrote " I" in Act_1:1 and refers to the Gospel as his work. The effort to disprove the unity of the Acts has failed. It stands as the work of the same author as a whole and the same author who wrote the Gospel.

Sources of the Acts

Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luk_1:1-4). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the " we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul’s own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapter 8 to chapter 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul’s sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his Composition and Date of Acts (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after Luk_1:1-4. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Gal_1:18) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts 15 and Galatians 2). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul’s friend (Act_9:27) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Act_4:36.). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Act_21:8.). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the " we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

The Date

There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy post eventum . The other reason is the alleged use of the Antiquities of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work a.d. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Act_5:36. and Josephus, Ant . XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz ( Dictionary of the Apostolic Church , art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. So Luke (Luk_13:1.) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in Act_12:20-23 and Ant . XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul’s release, that is by a.d. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of prōton (first) in Act_1:1 is a common Koiné[28928]š idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark’s Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

The Historical Value

It was once a fad with a certain school of critics to decry Luke in the Acts as wholly untrustworthy, not above the legendary stage. But the spade has done well by Luke for inscriptions and papyri have brought remarkable confirmation for scores of points where Luke once stood all alone and was discounted because he stood alone. These will be duly noted in the proper places as they occur. Ramsay has done most in this restoration of the rank of Luke as a credible historian, as shown in particular in his St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen and in The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament . In every instance where discoveries have been made they have confirmed the testimony of Luke as concerning politarchs in Thessalonica, proconsul in Cyprus, etc. The result is that the balance of evidence is now in favour of Luke even when he still stands alone or seems to be opposed by Josephus. Luke, as it stands today, is a more credible historian than Josephus. Ramsay dares to call Luke, all things considered, the greatest of all historians, even above Thucydides. An interesting book on this phase of the subject is Chase’s The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles (1902).

The Purpose of the Acts

It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul’s career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still ( St. Paul on Trial , 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul’s trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul’s series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.

The Text of the Acts

A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae . The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, The Text of Acts in Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity . Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass’s ideas appear in his Acta Apostolorum .

JFB: Acts (Book Introduction)

THIS book is to the Gospels what the fruit is to the tree that bears it. In the Gospels we see the corn of wheat falling into the ground and dying: in the Acts we see it bringing forth much fruit (Joh 12:24). There we see Christ purchasing the Church with His own blood: here we see the Church, so purchased, rising into actual existence; first among the Jews of Palestine, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, until it gains a footing in the great capital of the ancient world--sweeping majestically from Jerusalem to Rome. Nor is this book of less value as an Introduction to the Epistles which follow it, than as a Sequel to the Gospels which precede it. For without this history the Epistles of the New Testament--presupposing, as they do, the historical circumstances of the parties addressed, and deriving from these so much of their freshness, point, and force--would in no respect be what they now are, and would in a number of places be scarcely intelligible.

The genuineness, authenticity, and canonical authority of this book were never called in question within the ancient Church. It stands immediately after the Gospels, in the catalogues of the Homologoumena, or universally acknowledged books of the New Testament (see Introduction to our larger Commentary, Vol. V, pp. iv, v). It was rejected, indeed, by certain heretical sects in the second and third centuries--by the Ebionites, the Severians (see EUSEBIUS, Ecclesiastical History, 4.29), the Marcionites, and the Manicheans: but the totally uncritical character of their objections (see Introduction above referred to, pp. xiii, xiv) not only deprives them of all weight, but indirectly shows on what solid grounds the Christian Church had all along proceeded in recognizing this book.

In our day, however, its authenticity has, like that of all the leading books of the New Testament, been made the subject of keen and protracted controversy. DE WETTE, while admitting Luke to be the author of the entire work, pronounces the earlier portion of it to have been drawn up from unreliable sources (New-Testament Introduction, 2a, 2C). But the Tubingen school, with BAUR at their head, have gone much farther. As their fantastic theory of the post-Joannean date of the Gospels could not pretend even to a hearing so long as the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles remained unshaken, they contend that the earlier portion of this work can be shown to be unworthy of credit, while the latter portion is in flat contradiction to the Epistle to the Galatians--which this school regard as unassailable--and bears internal evidence of being a designed distortion of facts for the purpose of setting up the catholic form which Paul gave to Christianity in opposition to the narrow Judaic but original form of it which Peter preached, and which after the death of the apostles was held exclusively by the sect of the Ebionites. It is painful to think that anyone should have spent so many years, and, aided by learned and acute disciples in different parts of the argument, should have expended so much learning, research, and ingenuity in attempting to build up a hypothesis regarding the origination of the leading books of the New Testament which outrages all the principles of sober criticism and legitimate evidence. As a school, this party at length broke up: its head, after living to find himself the sole defender of the theory as a whole, left this earthly scene complaining of desertion. While some of his associates have abandoned such heartless studies altogether for the more congenial pursuits of philosophy, others have modified their attacks on the historical truth of the New Testament records, retreating into positions into which it is not worth while to follow them, while others still have been gradually approximating to sound principles. The one compensation for all this mischief is the rich additions to the apologetical and critical literature of the books of the New Testament, and the earliest history of the Christian Church, which it has drawn from the pens of THIERSCH, EBRARD, and many others. Any allusions which it may be necessary for us to make to the assertions of this school will be made in connection with the passages to which they relate--in Acts, First Corinthians, and Galatians.

The manifest connection between this book and the third Gospel--of which it professes to be simply the continuation by the same author--and the striking similarity which marks the style of both productions, leave no room to doubt that the early Church was right in ascribing it with one consent to Luke. The difficulty which some fastidious critics have made about the sources of the earlier portion of the history has no solid ground. That the historian himself was an eye-witness of the earliest scenes--as HUG concludes from the circumstantiality of the narrative--is altogether improbable: but there were hundreds of eye-witnesses of some of the scenes, and enough of all the rest, to give to the historian, partly by oral, partly by written testimony, all the details which he has embodied so graphically in his history; and it will appear, we trust, from the commentary, that De Wette's complaints of confusion, contradiction, and error in this portion are without foundation. The same critic, and one or two others, would ascribe to Timothy those later portions of the book in which the historian speaks in the first person plural--"we"; supposing him to have taken notes of all that passed under his own eye, which Luke embodied in his history just as they stood. It is impossible here to refute this gratuitous hypothesis in detail; but the reader will find it done by EBRARD (The Gospel History, sect. 110, Clark's translation; sect. 127 of the original work, Wissenschaftliche Kritik der Evangelische Geschichte, 1850), and by DAVIDSON (Introduction to New Testament, Vol. II, pp. 9-21).

The undesigned coincidences between this History and the Apostolic Epistles have been brought out and handled, as an argument for the truth of the facts thus attested, with unrivalled felicity by PALEY in his Horæ Paulinæ, to which Mr. BIRKS has made a number of ingenious additions in his Horæ Apostolicæ. Exception has been taken to some of these by JOWETT (St. Paul's Epistles, Vol. I, pp. 108 ff.), not without a measure of reason in certain cases--for our day, at least--though even he admits that in this line of evidence the work of PALEY, taken as a whole, is unassailable.

Much has been written about the object of this history. Certainly "the Acts of the Apostles" are but very partially recorded. But for this title the historian is not responsible. Between the two extremes--of supposing that the work has no plan at all, and that it is constructed on an elaborate and complex plan, we shall probably be as near the truth as is necessary if we take the design to be to record the diffusion of Christianity and the rise of the Christian Church, first among the Jews of Palestine, the seat of the ancient Faith, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, with Antioch for its headquarters, until, finally, it is seen waving over imperial Rome, foretokening its universal triumph. In this view of it, there is no difficulty in accounting for the almost exclusive place which it gives to the labors of Peter in the first instance, and the all but entire disappearance from the history both of him and of the rest of the Twelve after the great apostle of the Gentiles came upon the stage--like the lesser lights on the rise of the great luminary.

JFB: Acts (Outline)

• INTRODUCTION--LAST DAYS OF OUR LORD UPON EARTH--HIS ASCENSION. (Act 1:1-11)
• RETURN OF THE ELEVEN TO JERUSALEM--PROCEEDINGS IN THE UPPER ROOM TILL PENTECOST. (Act 1:12-26)
• DESCENT OF THE SPIRIT--THE DISCIPLES SPEAK WITH TONGUES--AMAZEMENT OF THE MULTITUDE. (Act 2:1-13)
• PETER FOR THE FIRST TIME, PUBLICLY PREACHES CHRIST. (Acts 2:14-36)
• BEAUTIFUL BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. (Act 2:41-47)
• PETER AND JOHN DISMISSED FROM THE SAMHEDRIM, REPORT THE PROCEEDINGS TO THE ASSEMBLED DISCIPLES--THEY ENGAGE IN PRAYER--THE ASTONISHING ANSWER AND RESULTS. (Act 4:23-37)
• ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA. (Act 5:1-11)
• THE PROGRESS OF THE NEW CAUSE LEADS TO THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES--THEY ARE MIRACULOUSLY DELIVERED FROM PRISON, RESUME THEIR TEACHING, BUT ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE CONDUCTED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 5:12-26)
• SECOND APPEARANCE AND TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM--ITS RAGE CALMED BY GAMALIEL--BEING DISMISSED, THEY DEPART REJOICING, AND CONTINUE THEIR PREACHING. (Acts 5:27-42)
• FIRST ELECTION OF DEACONS. (Act 6:1-7)
• STEPHEN ARRAIGNED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 6:8-15)
• DEFENSE AND MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN. (Acts 7:1-60)
• PERSECUTION CONTINUED, IN WHICH SAUL TAKES A PROMINENT PART--HOW OVERRULED FOR GOOD. (Act 8:1-4)
• SUCCESS OF PHILIP'S PREACHING IN SAMARIA--CASE OF SIMON MAGUS. (Acts 8:5-25)
• THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. (Act 8:26-40)
• CONVERSION OF SAUL, AND BEGINNINGS OF HIS MINISTRY. (Acts 9:1-25)
• SAUL'S FIRST VISIT TO JERUSALEM AFTER HIS CONVERSION. (Act 9:26-31)
• FLOURISHING STATE OF THE CHURCH IN PALESTINE AT THIS TIME. (Act 9:31)
• PETER HEALS ENEAS AT LYDDA AND RAISES TABITHA TO LIFE AT JOPPA. (Act 9:32-43)
• ACCESSION AND BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS AND HIS PARTY; OR, THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THE GENTILES. (Acts 10:1-48)
• THE GOSPEL BEING PREACHED TO GENTILES AT ANTIOCH ALSO BARNABAS IS SENT THITHER FROM JERUSALEM, WHO HAILS THEIR ACCESSION AND LABORS AMONG THEM. (Act 11:19-24)
• BARNABAS, FINDING THE WORK IN ANTIOCH TOO MUCH FOR HIM, GOES TO TARSUS FOR SAUL--THEY LABOR THERE TOGETHER FOR A WHOLE YEAR WITH MUCH SUCCESS, AND ANTIOCH BECOMES THE HONORED BIRTHPLACE OF THE TERM CHRISTIAN. (Act 11:25-26)
• BY OCCASION OF A FAMINE BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO JERUSALEM WITH A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE RELIEF OF THEIR SUFFERING BRETHREN. (Act 11:27-30)
• PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I--MARTYRDOM OF JAMES AND MIRACULOUS DELIVERANCE OF PETER. (Acts 12:1-19)
• HEROD'S MISERABLE END--GROWING SUCCESS OF THE GOSPEL--BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO ANTIOCH. (Act 12:20-25)
• BARNABAS AND SAUL, DIVINELY CALLED TO LABOR AMONG THE GENTILES, ARE SET APART AND SENT FORTH BY THE CHURCH AT ANTIOCH. (Act 13:1-3)
• ARRIVING IN CYPRUS THEY PREACH IN THE SYNAGOGUES OF SALAMIS--AT PAPHOS, ELYMAS IS STRUCK BLIND, AND THE GOVERNOR OF THE ISLAND IS CONVERTED. (Act 13:4-12)
• AT PERGA JOHN MARK FORSAKES THEM--AT ANTIOCH IN PISIDIA, PAUL PREACHES WITH GLORIOUS EFFECT--THE JEWS, ENRAGED, EXPEL THEM OUT OF THEM COASTS. (Acts 13:13-52)
• MEETING WITH SIMILAR SUCCESS AND SIMILAR OPPOSITION AT ICONIUM, PAUL AND BARNABAS FLEE FOR THEIR LIVES TO LYSTRA AND DERBE, AND PREACH THERE. (Act 14:1-7)
• AT LYSTRA PAUL HEALING A CRIPPLE, THE PEOPLE ARE SCARCE RESTRAINED FROM SACRIFICING TO THEM AS GODS, BUT AFTERWARDS, THEIR MINDS BEING POISONED, THEY STONE PAUL, LEAVING HIM FOR DEAD--WITHDRAWING TO DERBE, THEY PREACH AND TEACH THERE. (Act 14:8-21)
• COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM TO DECIDE ON THE NECESSITY OF CIRCUMCISION FOR THE GENTILE CONVERTS. (Acts 15:1-35)
• DISSENSION BETWEEN PAUL AND BARNABAS--THEY PART COMPANY TO PROSECUTE SEPARATE MISSIONARY TOURS. (Act 15:36-46)
• THEY BREAK NEW GROUND IN PHRYGIA AND GALATIA--THEIR COURSE IN THAT DIRECTION BEING MYSTERIOUSLY HEDGED UP, THEY TRAVEL WESTWARD TO TROAS, WHERE THEY ARE DIVINELY DIRECTED TO MACEDONIA--THE HISTORIAN HIMSELF HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY, THEY EMBARK FOR NEAPOLIS, AND REACH PHILIPPI. (Act 16:6-12)
• AT THESSALONICA THE SUCCESS OF PAUL'S PREACHING ENDANGERING HIS LIFE, HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT TO BEREA, WHERE HIS MESSAGE MEETS WITH ENLIGHTENED ACCEPTANCE--A HOSTILE MOVEMENT FROM THESSALONICA OCCASIONS HIS SUDDEN DEPARTURE FROM BEREA--HE ARRIVES AT ATHENS. (Act 17:1-15)
• PAUL AT ATHENS. (Acts 17:16-34)
• PAUL'S ARRIVAL AND LABORS AT CORINTH, WHERE HE IS REJOINED BY SILAS AND TIMOTHY, AND, UNDER DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT, MAKES A LONG STAY--AT LENGTH, RETRACING HIS STEPS, BY EPHESUS, CÆSAREA, AND JERUSALEM, HE RETURNS FOR THE LAST TIME TO ANTIOCH, THUS COMPLETING HIS SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Acts 18:1-22)
• PAUL'S THIRD AND LAST MISSIONARY JOURNEY--HE VISITS THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA AND PHRYGIA. (Acts 18:23-21:16)
• EPISODE CONCERNING APOLLOS AT EPHESUS AND IN ACHAIA. (Act 18:24-28)
• SIGNAL SUCCESS OF PAUL AT EPHESUS. (Acts 19:1-41)
• PAUL FULFILS HIS PURPOSE OF PROCEEDING AGAIN TO MACEDONIA AND GREECE--RETURNING THENCE, ON HIS ROUTE FOR JERUSALEM, HE REVISITS PHILIPPI AND TROAS--HIS MINISTRATIONS AT TROAS. (Act 20:1-12)
• CONTINUING HIS ROUTE TO JERUSALEM HE REACHES MILETUS, WHENCE HE SENDS FOR THE ELDERS OF EPHESUS--HIS FAREWELL ADDRESS TO THEM. (Acts 20:13-38)
• SAILING FROM EPHESUS, THEY LAND AT TYRE, AND THENCE SAILING TO PTOLEMAIS, THEY PROCEED BY LAND TO CÆSAREA AND JERUSALEM. (Acts 21:1-16)
• PAUL REPORTS THE EVENTS OF HIS THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY--IN THE TEMPLE, PURIFYING HIMSELF FROM A JEWISH VOW, HE IS SEIZED BY A MOB AND BEATEN TO THE DANGER OF HIS LIFE--THE UPROAR BECOMING UNIVERSAL, THE ROMAN COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT IN CHAINS TO THE FORTRESS, FROM THE STAIRS OF WHICH HE IS PERMITTED TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE. (Acts 21:17-40)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE FROM THE STAIRS OF THE FORTRESS--THE RAGE OF THE AUDIENCE BURSTING FORTH, THE COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT INTO THE FORT TO BE EXAMINED BY SCOURGING, BUT LEARNING THAT HE IS A ROMAN, HE ORDERS HIS RELEASE AND COMMANDS THE SAMHEDRIM TO TRY HIM. (Acts 22:1-30)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM DIVIDES THE RIVAL FACTIONS, FROM WHOSE VIOLENCE THE COMMANDANT HAS THE APOSTLE REMOVED INTO THE FORTRESS. (Act 23:1-10)
• IN THE FORTRESS PAUL IS CHEERED BY A NIGHT VISION--AN INFAMOUS CONSPIRACY TO ASSASSINATE HIM IS PROVIDENTIALLY DEFEATED, AND HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT WITH A LETTER FROM THE COMMANDANT TO FELIX AT CÆSAREA, BY WHOM ARRANGEMENTS ARE MADE FOR A HEARING OF HIS CAUSE. (Acts 23:11-35)
• PAUL, ACCUSED BY A PROFESSIONAL PLEADER BEFORE FELIX, MAKES HIS DEFENSE, AND IS REMANDED FOR A FURTHER HEARING. AT A PRIVATE INTERVIEW FELIX TREMBLES UNDER PAUL'S PREACHING, BUT KEEPS HIM PRISONER FOR TWO YEARS, WHEN HE WAS SUCCEEDED BY FESTUS. (Acts 24:1-27)
• FESTUS, COMING TO JERUSALEM, DECLINES TO HAVE PAUL BROUGHT THITHER FOR JUDGMENT, BUT GIVES THE PARTIES A HEARING ON HIS RETURN TO CÆSAREA--ON FESTUS ASKING THE APOSTLE IF HE WOULD GO TO JERUSALEM FOR ANOTHER HEARING BEFORE HIM, HE IS CONSTRAINED IN JUSTICE TO HIS CAUSE TO APPEAL TO THE EMPEROR. (Act 25:1-12)
• HEROD AGRIPPA II ON A VISIT TO FESTUS, BEING CONSULTED BY HIM ON PAUL'S CASE, DESIRES TO HEAR THE APOSTLE, WHO IS ACCORDINGLY BROUGHT FORTH. (Act 25:13-27)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE OF HIMSELF BEFORE KING AGRIPPA, WHO PRONOUNCES HIM INNOCENT, BUT CONCLUDES THAT THE APPEAL TO CÆSAR MUST BE CARRIED OUT. (Acts 26:1-32)
• THE VOYAGE TO ITALY--THE SHIPWRECK AND SAFE LANDING AT MALTA. (Acts 27:1-44)
• THE WINTERING AT MALTA, AND NOTABLE OCCURRENCES THERE--PROSECUTION OF THE VOYAGE TO ITALY AS FAR AS PUTEOLI, AND LAND JOURNEY THENCE TO ROME--SUMMARY OF THE APOSTLE'S LABORS THERE FOR THE TWO FOLLOWING YEARS. (Acts 28:1-31)
• PAUL AND BARNABAS RETRACE THEIR STEPS, RETURN TO ANTIOCH IN SYRIA, AND THUS COMPLETE THEIR FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Act 14:21-28)
• VISITATION OF THE CHURCHES FORMERLY ESTABLISHED, TIMOTHEUS HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY. (Acts 15:41-16:5)
• AT PHILIPPI, LYDIA IS GAINED AND WITH HER HOUSEHOLD BAPTIZED--AN EVIL SPIRIT IS EXPELLED, PAUL AND SILAS ARE SCOURGED, IMPRISONED, AND MANACLED, BUT MIRACULOUSLY SET FREE, AND THE JAILER WITH ALL HIS HOUSEHOLD CONVERTED AND BAPTIZED. (Act 16:12-34)

TSK: Acts (Book Introduction)

The Acts of the Apostles is a most valuable portion of Divine revelation; and, independently of its universal reception in the Christian church, as an authentic and inspired production, it bears the most satisfactory internal evidence of its authenticity and truth. St. Luke’s long attendance upon St. Paul, and his having been an eyewitness of many of the facts which he has recorded, independently of his Divine inspiration, render him a most suitable and credible historian; and his medical knowledge, for he is allowed to have been a physician, enabled him both to form a proper judgment of the miraculous cures which were performed by St. Paul, and to give an authentic and circumstantial detail of them. The plainness and simplicity of the narrative are also strong circumstances in its favour. The history of the Acts is one of the most important parts of the Sacred History, for without it neither the Gospels nor Epistles could have been so clearly understood; but by the aid of it the whole scheme of the Christian revelation is set before us in a clear and easy view.

TSK: Acts 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Act 2:1, The apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost, and speaking divers languages, are admired by some, and derided by others; Act 2:14, whom Peter disproves; Act 2:37, he baptizes a great number that were converted; Act 2:41, who afterwards devoutly and charitably converse together; the apostles working many miracles, and God daily increasing his church.

Poole: Acts 2 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 2

MHCC: Acts (Book Introduction)

This book unites the Gospels to the Epistles. It contains many particulars concerning the apostles Peter and Paul, and of the Christian church from the ascension of our Saviour to the arrival of St. Paul at Rome, a space of about thirty years. St. Luke was the writer of this book; he was present at many of the events he relates, and attended Paul to Rome. But the narrative does not afford a complete history of the church during the time to which it refers, nor even of St. Paul's life. The object of the book has been considered to be, 1. To relate in what manner the gifts of the Holy Spirit were communicated on the day of Pentecost, and the miracles performed by the apostles, to confirm the truth of Christianity, as showing that Christ's declarations were really fulfilled. 2. To prove the claim of the Gentiles to be admitted into the church of Christ. This is shown by much of the contents of the book. A large portion of the Acts is occupied by the discourses or sermons of various persons, the language and manner of which differ, and all of which will be found according to the persons by whom they were delivered, and the occasions on which they were spoken. It seems that most of these discourses are only the substance of what was actually delivered. They relate nevertheless fully to Jesus as the Christ, the anointed Messiah.

MHCC: Acts 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(Act 2:1-4) The descent of the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost.

(Act 2:5-13) The apostles speak in divers languages.

(v. 14-36) Peter's address to the Jews.

(Act 2:37-41) Three thousand souls converted.

(Act 2:42-47) The piety and affection of the disciples.

Matthew Henry: Acts (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Acts of the Apostles

We have with an abundant satisfaction seen the foundation of our holy religion laid in the history of our blessed Saviour, its great author, which was related and left upon record by four several inspired writers, who all agree in this sacred truth, and the incontestable proofs of it, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Upon this rock the Christian church is built. How it began to be built upon this rock comes next to be related in this book which we have now before us, and of this we have the testimony only of one witness; for the matters of fact concerning Christ were much more necessary to be fully related and attested than those concerning the apostles. Had Infinite Wisdom seen fit, we might have had as many books of the Acts of the Apostles as we have gospels, nay, as we might have had gospels: but, for fear of over-burdening the world (Joh 21:25), we have sufficient to answer the end, if we will but make use of it. The history of this book (which was always received as a part of the sacred canon) may be considered.

I. As looking back to the preceding gospels, giving light to them, and greatly assisting our faith in them. The promises there made we here find made good, particularly the great promises of the descent of the Holy Ghost, and his wonderful operations, both on the apostles (whom here in a few days we find quite other men than what the gospels left them; no longer weak-headed and weak-hearted, but able to say that which then they were not able to bear (Joh 16:12) as bold as lions to face those hardships at the thought of which they then trembled as lambs), and also with the apostles, making the word mighty to the pulling down of Satan's strong holds, which had been before comparatively preached in vain. The commission there granted to the apostles we here find executed, and the powers there lodged in them we here find exerted in miracles wrought on the bodies of people - miracles of mercy, restoring sick bodies to health and dead bodies to life - miracles of judgment, striking rebels blind or dead; and much greater miracles wrought on the minds of people, in conferring spiritual gifts upon them, both of understanding and utterance; and this in pursuance of Christ's purposes, and in performance of his promises, which we had in the gospels. The proofs of Christ's resurrection with which the gospels closed are here abundantly corroborated, not only by the constant and undaunted testimony of those that conversed with him after he arose (who had all deserted him, and one of them denied him, and would not otherwise have been rallied again but by his resurrection, but must have been irretrievably dispersed, and yet by that were enabled to own him more resolutely than ever, in defiance of bonds and deaths), but by the working of the Spirit with that testimony for the conversion of multitudes to the faith of Christ, according to the word of Christ, that his resurrection, the sign of the prophet Jonas, which was reserved to the last, should be the most convincing proof of his divine mission. Christ had told his disciples that they should be his witnesses, and this book brings them in witnessing for him, - that they should be fishers of men, and here we have them enclosing multitudes in the gospel-net, - that they should be the lights of the world, and here we have the world enlightened by them; but that day - spring from on high the first appearing of which we there discerned we here find shining more and more. The corn of wheat, which there fell to the ground, here springs up and bears much fruit; the grain of mustard-seed there is here a great tree; and the kingdom of heaven, which was then at hand, is here set up. Christ's predictions of the virulent persecutions which the preachers of the gospel should be afflicted with (though one could not have imagined that a doctrine so well worthy of all acceptation should meet with so much opposition) we here find abundantly fulfilled, and also the assurances he gave them of extraordinary supports and comforts under their sufferings. Thus, as the latter part of the history of the Old Testament verifies the promises made to the fathers of the former part (as appears by that famous and solemn acknowledgment of Solomon's, which runs like a receipt in full, 1Ki 8:56, There has not failed one word of all his good promises which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant ), so this latter part of the history of the New Testament exactly answers to the world of Christ in the former part of it: and thus they mutually confirm and illustrate each other.

II. As looking forward to the following epistles, which are an explication of the gospels, which open the mysteries of Christ's death and resurrection, the history of which we had in the gospels. This book introduces them and is a key to them, as the history of David is to David's psalms. We are members of the Christian church, that tabernacle of God among men, and it is our honour and privilege that we are so. Now this book gives us an account of the framing and rearing of that tabernacle. The four gospels showed us how the foundation of that house was laid; this shows us how the superstructure began to be raised, 1. Among the Jews and Samaritans, which we have an account of in the former part of this book. 2. Among the Gentiles, which we have an account of in the latter part: from thence, and downward to our own day, we find the Christian church subsisting in a visible profession of faith in Christ, as the Son of God and Saviour of the world, made by his baptized disciples, incorporated into religious societies, statedly meeting in religious assemblies, attending on the apostles' doctrine, and joining in prayers and the breaking of bread, under the guidance and presidency of men that gave themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word, and in a spiritual communion with all in every place that do likewise. Such a body as this thee is now in the world, which we belong to: and, to our great satisfaction and honour, in this book we find the rise and origin of it, vastly different from the Jewish church, and erected upon its ruins; but undeniably appearing to be of God, and not of man. With what confidence and comfort may we proceed in, and adhere to, our Christian profession, as far as we find it agrees with this pattern in the mount, to which we ought religiously to conform and confine ourselves!

Two things more are to be observed concerning this book: - (1.) The penman of it. It was written by Luke, who wrote the third of the four gospels, which bears his name; and who (as the learned Dr. Whitby shows) was, very probably, one of the seventy disciples, whose commission (Luk 10:1, etc.) was little inferior to that of the twelve apostles. This Luke was very much a companion of Paul in his services and sufferings. Only Luke is with me, 2Ti 4:11. We may know by his style in the latter part of this book when and where he was with him, for then he writes, We did so and so, as Act 16:10; Act 20:6; and thenceforward to the end of the book. He was with Paul in his dangerous voyage to Rome, when he was carried thither a prisoner, was with him when from his prison there he wrote his epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, in both which he is named. And it should seem that St. Luke wrote this history when he was with St. Paul at Rome, during his imprisonment there, and was assistant to him; for the history concludes with St. Paul's preaching there in his own hired house. (2.) The title of it: The Acts of the Apostles; of the holy Apostles, so the Greek copies generally read it, and so they are called, Rev 18:20, Rejoice over her you holy apostles. One copy inscribes it, The Acts of the Apostles by Luke the Evangelist. [1.] It is the history of the apostles; yet there is in it the history of Stephen, Barnabas, and some other apostolical men, who, though not of the twelve, were endued with the same Spirit, and employed in the same work; and, of those that were apostles, it is the history of Peter and Paul only that is here recorded (and Paul was now of the twelve), Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and Paul the apostles of the Gentiles, Gal 2:7. But this suffices as a specimen of what the rest did in other places, pursuant to their commission, for there were none of them idle; and as we are to think what is related in the gospels concerning Christ sufficient, because Infinite Wisdom thought so, the same we are to think here concerning what is related of the apostles and their labours; for what more is told us from tradition of the labours and sufferings of the apostles, and the churches they planted, is altogether doubtful and uncertain, and what I think we cannot build upon with any satisfaction at all. This is gold, silver, and precious stones, built upon the foundation: that is wood, hay, and stubble. [2.] It is called their acts, or doings; Gesta apostolorum; so some. Praxeis - their practices of the lessons their Master had taught them. The apostles where active men; and though the wonders they did were by the word, yet they are fitly called their acts; they spoke, or rather the Spirit by them spoke, and it was done. The history is filled with their sermons and their sufferings; yet so much did they labour in their preaching, and so voluntarily did they expose themselves to sufferings, and such were their achievements by both, that they may very well be called their acts.

Matthew Henry: Acts 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Between the promise of the Messiah (even the latest of those promises) and his coming many ages intervened; but between the promise of the Spirit and his coming there were but a few days; and during those days the apostles, though they had received orders to preach the gospel to every creature, and to begin at Jerusalem, yet lay perfectly wind-bound, incognito - concealed , and not offering to preach. But in this chapter the north wind and the south wind awake, and then they awake, and we have them in the pulpit presently. Here is, I. The descent of the Spirit upon the apostles, and those that were with them, on the day of pentecost (Act 2:1-4). II. The various speculations which this occasioned among the people that were now met in Jerusalem from all parts (Act 2:5-13) III. The sermon which Peter preached to them hereupon, wherein he shows that this pouring out of the Spirit was the accomplishment of an Old Testament promise (Act 2:14-21), that it was a confirmation of Christ's being the Messiah, which was already proved by his resurrection (Act 2:22-32), and that is was a fruit and evidence of his ascension into heaven (Act 2:33-36). IV. The good effect of this sermon in the conversion of many to the faith of Christ, and their addition to the church (Act 2:37-41). V. The eminent piety and charity of those primitive Christians, and the manifest tokens of God's presence with them, and power in them (Act 2:42-47).

Barclay: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

A Precious Book

In one sense Acts is the most important book in the New Testament. It is the simple truth that if we did not possess Acts, we would have, apart from what we could deduce from the letters of Paul, no information whatever about the early Church.

There are two ways of writing history. There is the way which attempts to trace the course of events from week to week and from day to day; and there is the way which, as it were, opens a series of windows and gives us vivid glimpses of the great moments and personalities of any period. The second way is the way of Acts.

We usually speak of The Acts of the Apostles. But the book neither gives nor claims to give an exhaustive account of the acts of the apostles. Apart from Paul only three apostles are mentioned in it. In Act_12:2 we are told in one brief sentence that James, the brother of John, was executed by Herod. John appears in the narrative, but never speaks. It is only about Peter that the book gives any real information, and very soon, as a leading character, he passes from the scene. In the Greek there is no The before Acts; the correct title is Acts of Apostolic Men; and what Acts aims to do is to give us a series of typical exploits of the heroic figures of the early Church.

The Writer Of The Book

Although the book never says so, from the earliest times Luke has been held to be its writer. About Luke we really know very little; there are only three references to him in the New Testament--Col_4:14 , Phm_1:24 , 2Ti_4:11 . From these we can say two things for sure. First, Luke was a doctor; second, he was one of Paulmost valued helpers and most loyal friends, for he was a companion of his in his last imprisonment. We can deduce the fact that he was a Gentile. Col_4:11 concludes a list of mentions and greetings from those who are of the circumcision, that is, from Jews; Col_4:12 begins a new list and we naturally conclude that the new list is of Gentiles. So then we have the very interesting fact that Luke is the only Gentile author in the New Testament.

We could have guessed that Luke was a doctor because of his instinctive use of medical words. In Luk_4:35 , in telling of the man who had the spirit of an unclean devil, he says "when the devil had thrown him down" and uses the correct medical word for convulsions. In Luk_9:38 when he draws the picture of the man who asked Jesus, "I beg you to look upon my son" he employs the conventional word for a doctor paying a visit to a patient. The most interesting example is in the saying about the camel and the needleeye. All three synoptic writers give us that saying (Mat_19:24 ; Mar_10:25 ; Luk_18:25 ). For needle both Mark and Matthew use the Greek raphis (G4476), the ordinary word for a tailoror a household needle. Luke alone uses belone, the technical word for a surgeonneedle. Luke was a doctor and a doctorwords came most naturally to his pen.

The Recipient Of The Book

Luke wrote both his gospel and Acts to a man called Theophilus (Luk_1:3 ; Act_1:1 ). We can only guess who Theophilus was. Luk_1:3 calls him "most excellent Theophilus." The phrase really means "your excellency," and indicates a man high up in the service of the Roman government. There are three possibilities.

(i) Just possibly Theophilus is not a real name at all. In those days it might well be dangerous to be a Christian. Theophilus comes from two Greek words, theos (G2316) which means God and philein (G5368) which means to love. It may be that Luke wrote to a lover of God whose real name he did not mention for safetysake.

(ii) If Theophilus was a real person, he must have been a high government official. Perhaps Luke wrote to show him that Christianity was a lovely thing and that Christians were good people. Maybe his writing was an attempt to persuade a government official not to persecute the Christians.

(iii) There is a more romantic theory than either of these based on the facts that Luke was a doctor and that doctors in the ancient days were often slaves. It has been conjectured that Luke was the doctor of Theophilus, that Theophilus had been gravely ill, that by Lukeskill and devotion he was brought back to health, and that in gratitude he gave Luke his freedom. Then, it may be, Luke wished to show how grateful he was for this gift; and since the most precious thing he had was the story of Jesus, he wrote it down and sent it to his benefactor.

LukeAim In Writing Acts

When a man writes a book he does so for a reason, and maybe for more than one. Let us consider now why Luke wrote Acts.

(i) One of his reasons was to commend Christianity to the Roman government.

Again and again he goes out of his way to show how courteous Roman magistrates were to Paul. In Act_13:12 Sergius Paulus, the governor of Cyprus, becomes a Christian. In Act_18:12 Gallio is absolutely impartial in Corinth. In Act_16:35 . the magistrates at Philippi discover their mistake and apologize publicly to Paul. In Act_19:31 the Asiarchs in Ephesus are shown to be concerned that no harm should come to Paul. Luke was pointing out that in the years before he wrote Roman officials had often been well-disposed and always just to Christianity.

Further, Luke takes pains to show that the Christians were good and loyal citizens. and had always been regarded as such. In Act_18:14 Gallio declares that there is no question of wickedness or villainy. In Act_19:37 the secretary of Ephesus gives the Christians a good testimonial. In Act_23:29 Claudius Lysias is careful to say that he has nothing against Paul. In Act_25:25 Festus declares that Paul has done nothing worthy of death, and in the same chapter Festus and Agrippa agree that Paul might well have been released had he not appealed to Caesar.

Luke was writing in the days when Christians were disliked and persecuted; and he told his story in such a way as to show that the Roman magistrates had always been perfectly fair to Christianity and that they had never regarded the Christians as evil men. In fact, the very interesting suggestion has been made that Acts is nothing other than the brief prepared for Pauldefense when he stood his trial before the Roman Emperor.

(ii) One of Lukeaims was to show that Christianity was for all men of every country.

This was one of the things the Jews found it hard to grasp. They had the idea that they were Godchosen people and that God had no use for any other nation. Luke sets out to prove otherwise. He shows Philip preaching to the Samaritans; he shows Stephen making Christianity universal and being killed for it; he shows Peter accepting Cornelius into the Church; he shows the Christians preaching to the Gentiles at Antioch; he shows Paul travelling far and wide winning men of all kinds for Christ; and in Ac 15 he shows the Church making the great decision to accept the Gentiles on equal terms with the Jews.

(iii) But these were merely secondary aims. Lukechief purpose is set out in the words of the Risen Christ in Luk_1:8 , "You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judaea and Samaria and to the end of the earth." It was to show the expansion of Christianity, to show how that religion which began in a little corner of Palestine had in not much more than thirty years reached Rome.

C. H. Turner has pointed out that Acts falls into six panels, each ending with what might be called a progress report. The six panels are:

(a) Ac 1-5; Act_6:1-7 ; this tells of the church at Jerusalem and the preaching of Peter; and it finishes with the summary, "The word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem; and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith."

(b) Act_6:8-15 ; Ac 7-8; Act_9:1-31 ; this describes the spread of Christianity through Palestine and the martyrdom of Stephen, followed by the preaching in Samaria. It ends with the summary, "So the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was built up; and, walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it was multiplied."

(c) Act_9:32-43 ; Ac 10-11; Act_12:1-24 ; this includes the conversion of Paul, the extension of the Church to Antioch, and the reception of Cornelius, the Gentile, into the Church by Peter. Its summary is, "The word of God grew and multiplied."

(d) Act_12:25 ; Ac 13-15; Act_16:1-5 ; this tells of the extension of the Church through Asia Minor and the preaching tour of Galatia. It ends, "So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily."

(e) Act_16:6-40 ; Ac 17-18; Act_19:1-20 ; this relates the extension of the Church to Europe and the work of Paul in great Gentile cities like Corinth and Ephesus. Its summary runs, "So the word of the Lord grew and prevailed mightily."

(j) Act_19:21-41 ; Ac 20-28; this tells of the arrival of Paul in Rome and his imprisonment there. It ends with the picture of Paul "preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered."

This plan of Acts answers its most puzzling question, why does it finish where it does? It finishes with Paul in prison awaiting judgment. We would so much have liked to know what happened to him and the end is wrapped in mystery. But Luke stopped there because his purpose was accomplished; he had shown how Christianity began in Jerusalem and swept across the world until it reached Rome. A great New Testament scholar has said that the title of Acts might be, "How they brought the Good News from Jerusalem to Rome."

LukeSources

Luke was an historian, and the sources from which an historian draws his information is all important. Where then did Luke get his facts? In this connection Acts falls into two parts.

(i) There are the first fifteen chapters, of whose events Luke had no personal knowledge. He very likely had access to two sources.

(a) There were the records of the local churches. They may never have been set down in writing but the churches had their stories. In this section we can distinguish three records. There is the record of the Jerusalem church which we find in Ac 1-5 and in Ac 15-16. There is the record of the church at Caesarea which covers Act_8:26-40 , Act_9:31-43 and Act_10:1-48 . There is the record of the church at Antioch which includes Act_11:19-30 , Act_12:25 , Ac 13 and Act_14:1-28 .

(b) Very likely there were cycles of stories which were the Acts of Peter, the Acts of John, the Acts of Philip and the Acts of Stephen. Beyond a doubt Lukefriendship with Paul would bring him into touch with all the great men of all the churches and all their stories would be at his disposal.

(ii) There is Ac 16-28. Of much of this section Luke had personal knowledge. When we read Acts carefully we notice a strange thing. Most of the time Lukenarrative is in the third person plural; but in certain passages it changes over to the first person plural and "they" becomes "we". The "we" passages are as follows--Acts 16:10-17; Act_20:5-16 ; Act_21:1-18 ; Ac 27 ; Act_28:1-16 . On all these occasions Luke must have been present. He must have kept a travel diary and in these passages we have eye-witness accounts. As for the times when he was not present, many were the hours he must have spent in prison with Paul and many were the stories Paul must have told him. There can have been no great figure Luke did not know and in every case he must have got his story from someone who was there.

When we read Acts we may be quite sure that no historian ever had better sources or used his sources more accurately.

FURTHER READING

Acts

F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (NLC; E)

E. Haenchen, Die Apostelgeschichte (G)

F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, The Beginnings Of Christianity (A five-volume work; especially useful are Vol.

IV, The Commentary and Vol. V, Additional Notes)

W. Neil, The Acts of the Apostles (NCB; E)

Abbreviations

NCB: New Century Bible

NLC: New London Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Acts 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The Day Of Pentecost (Act_2:1-13)

The Breath Of God (Act_2:1-13 Continued)

The First Christian Preaching (Act_2:14-41)

(i) There was kerugma (G2782). Kerugma (G2782) literally means a herald's announcement and is the plain statement of the facts of the Christian message, about which, as the early preachers saw it, there can be no argument or doubt. (ii) There was didache (G1322). Didache (G1322) literally means teaching and elucidated the meaning of the facts which had been proclaimed. (iii) There was paraklesis (G3874) which literally means exhortation. This kind of preaching urged upon men the duty of fitting their lives to match the kerugma (G2782) and the didache (G1322) which had been given. (iv) There was homilia (G3657) which means the treatment of any subject or department of life in light of the Christian message. Fully rounded preaching has something of all four elements. There is the plain proclamation of the facts of the Christian gospel; the explanation of the meaning and the relevance of these facts; the exhortation to fit life to them; and the treatment of all the activities of life in the light of the Christian message. In Acts we shall meet mainly with kerugma (G2782) because Acts tells of the proclamation of the facts of the gospel to those who had never heard them before. This kerugma (G2782) follows a pattern which repeats itself over and over again all over the New Testament. (i) There is the proof that Jesus and all that happened to him is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. In modern times less and less stress has been laid on the fulfillment of prophecy. We have come to see that the prophets were not nearly so much fore-tellers of events to come as forth-tellers of God's truth to men. But this stress of early preaching on prophecy conserved the great truth that history is not haphazard and that there is meaning to it. To believe in the possibility of prophecy is to believe that God is in control and that he is working out his purposes. (ii) In Jesus the Messiah has come, the Messianic prophecies are fulfilled and the and the New Age has dawned. The early Church had a tremendous sense that Jesus was the hinge of all history; that with his coming, eternity had invaded time; and that, therefore, life and the world could never be the same again. (iii) The kerugma (G2782) went on to state that Jesus had been born of the line of David, that he had taught, that he had worked miracles, that he had been crucified, that he had been raised from the dead and that he was now at the right hand of God. The early Church was sure that the Christian religion was based on the earthly life of Christ. But it was also certain that that earthly life and death were not the end and that after them came the resurrection. Jesus was not merely someone about whom they read or heard; he was someone whom they met and knew, a living presence. (iv) The early preachers went on to insist that Jesus would return in glory to establish his kingdom upon earth. In other words, the early Church believed intensely in the Second Coming. This doctrine has to some extent passed out of modern preaching but it does conserve the truth that history is going somewhere and that some day there will be a consummation; and that a man is therefore in the way or on the way. (v) The preaching finished with the statement that in Jesus alone was salvation, that he who believed on him would receive the Holy Spirit and that he who would not believe was destined for terrible things. That is to say, it finished with both a promise and a threat. It is exactly like that voice which Bunyan heard as if at his very shoulder demanding, "Wilt thou leave thy sins and go to heaven, or wilt thou have thy sins and go to hell?" If we read through Peter's sermon as a whole we will see how these five strands are woven into it.

God's Day Has Come (Act_2:14-21)

Lord And Christ (Act_2:22-36)

Save Yourselves (Act_2:37-41)

The Characteristics Of The Church (Act_2:42-47)

Constable: Acts (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title "Acts of the Apostles" is very ancient. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue to the Gospel of Luke (150-180 A.D.) contains the oldest reference to the book by this name. The title is a bit misleading, however, because the book contains only a few of the acts of some of the apostles, primarily Peter and Paul.

Writer

Two lines of argument lead to the conclusion that Luke, the friend, fellow missionary, and physician of Paul wrote this book under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. First, there is the internal evidence, the passages written in the first person plural that can refer to Luke (16:10-40; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). Second, we have external evidence indicating that Luke wrote Acts. This evidence includes references by early church fathers,¹ comments in collections of New Testament books,² and editorial statements in early notes on certain New Testament books.³

Date and place of composition

The date of composition was probably in the early sixties, 60-62 A.D. In view of his emphases Luke probably would have mentioned several important events had they occurred by the time he wrote. These include the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Paul's death in 68 A.D., and the Neronian persecution of Christians that began in 64 A.D.

We do not know for sure where Luke was when he wrote Acts. Perhaps he composed it over a period of years drawing on various sources and then put it into its final form in Rome where Paul was in confinement for two years (28:30-31; 60-62 A.D.).

"Fortunately the intelligibility and value of the book are largely independent of a knowledge of the precise situation in which it was written. While the finer points of the interpretation of Acts can still cause intense discussion among scholars, the essential themes of the book are basically clear and simple."⁴

Scope

The events recorded in Acts cover a period of about 30 years beginning with the Lord's ascension in 33 A.D. to Paul's two-year Roman house arrest that ended about 62 A.D.⁵

Purpose

There seems to have been a three-fold purpose for the writing of Acts. As with the other books of the Bible that record history in narrative form, certainly the Holy Spirit had a historical purpose.⁶ He intended to provide an inspired record of selected events that show the spread of the gospel and the church. They branched out from Jerusalem, the center of Judaism where the church began, to Rome, the uttermost part of the Gentile earth.

"Streeter suggested that an alternative title for the book of Acts might be The Road to Rome', for this is indeed the significance of Luke's work. Whatever minor motifs Luke had in mind, such as the establishment of Christianity in men's minds as a constructive and not destructive element in the social order, his main concern was to show that, in God's plan for the renewal of the life of mankind, Jerusalem, the heart of old Israel, was the goal of Stage I [i.e., the Book of Luke], while Rome, the centre of the world, was the goal of Stage II [i.e., the Book of Acts]."⁷

However the fact that Luke included what he did and omitted much other historical data indicates a second theological purpose. He showed how the plans and purposes of God were working out through history. In particular he showed how Jesus Christ was faithfully and irresistibly building His church (Matt. 16:18).⁸ This involved clarifying how God's dealings with humankind had taken a different course because of the Jews' rejection of their Messiah.

Third, Luke evidently had an apologetic purpose in writing. He frequently pointed out the relationship of the church to the Roman state by referring to many Roman officials not one of whom opposed Christianity because of its doctrines or practices. This would have made Acts a powerful defensive tool for the early Christians in their struggle to survive in a hostile pagan environment.⁹

". . . the Acts is to be seen in close literary association with the Gospel [of Luke]. They form two parts of one work, conceived in its final form as a unity, whether or not the original composition of the Gospel took place independently of the plan to produce the two-part work. Although there are other examples of literary compositions in two parts (Josephus, Contra Apionem, is one of the nearest parallels to Luke-Acts in time and cultural context), Luke's work appears to be unique among Christian writings and to have no close secular precedents in its combination of the stories of a religious leader and of his followers."¹⁰

". . . Luke in Acts is not merely concerned to draw a link between the time of Jesus and the time of the early church, as is commonly noticed, but also between the time of Israel and the time of Jesus and His church. Acts insists that the God who was at work in the history of his ancient people, Israel, bringing them salvation, is the same God who is at work in the church."¹¹

Unique features

Acts is the only New Testament book that continues the history begun in the Gospels. It is also an indispensable historical record for understanding the Apostle Paul's epistles; without it we could not understand some of the things he wrote. It is the only Bible book that records the historical transition from Judaism to Christianity. It provides basic information about and insight into the early church. And it challenges every modern Christian.¹²

Structure

Longenecker identified five phenomena about the structure of Acts that the reader needs to recognize to appreciate what Luke sought to communicate.

"1. It begins, like the [Third] Gospel, with an introductory section of distinctly Lukan cast dealing with the constitutive events of the Christian mission (1:1-2:41) before it sets forth the advances of the gospel in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth' (1:7).

"2. This introductory section is followed by what appears to be a thematic statement (2:42-47). This material, while often viewed as a summary of what precedes, most probably serves as the thesis paragraph for what follows.

"3. In his presentation of the advance of the Christian mission, Luke follows an essentially geographical outline that moves from Jerusalem (2:42-6:7), through Judea and Samaria (6:8-9:31), on into Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24), then to the Gentiles in the eastern part of the Roman Empire (12:25-19:20), and finally culminates in Paul's defenses and the entrance of the gospel into Rome (19:21-28:31).

"4. In his presentation, Luke deliberately sets up a number of parallels between the ministry of Peter in the first half of Acts and that of Paul in the last half.¹³

"5. Luke includes six summary statements or progress reports' (6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; and 28:31), each of which seems to conclude its own panel' of material.¹⁴

"Taking all these literary and structural features into account, we may conclude that Luke developed his material in Acts along the following lines:

"Introduction: The Constitutive Events of the Christian Mission (1:1-2:41)

Part I: The Christian Mission to the Jewish World (2:42-12:24)

Panel 1--The Earliest Days of the Church at Jerusalem (2:42-6:7)

Summary Statement: So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith' (6:7).

Panel 2--Critical Events in the Lives of Three Pivotal Figures (6:8-9:31)

Summary Statement: Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord' (9:31).

Panel 3--Advances of the Gospel in Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24)

Summary Statement: But the word of God continued to increase and spread' (12:24).

Part II: The Christian Mission to the Gentile World (12:25-28:31)

Panel 4--The First Missionary Journey and the Jerusalem Council (12:25-16:5)

Summary Statement: So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers' (16:5).

Panel 5--Wide Outreach Through Two Missionary Journeys (16:6-19:20)

Summary Statement: In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power' (19:20).

Panel 6--To Jerusalem and Thence to Rome (19:21-28:31)

Summary Statement: Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ' (28:31)."¹⁵

Message¹⁶

If I were to boil down to one sentence what the Book of Acts is in the Bible to teach us, I would say this.

The message of Acts is that the church of Jesus Christ is God's instrument to glorify Himself in the present age. The subject of the Book of Acts, what is its primary focus of attention, is the church of Jesus Christ.

Acts contains three major revelations regarding the church that I would like to point out.

The first of these concerns is the origin of the church. Jesus Christ created the church.

During His earthly ministry Jesus Christ prepared for the creation of the church. He instructed His disciples with truth they did not fully understand at the time, and He demonstrated for them life that they did not fully appreciate at the time (John 14:6). We have this record in the Gospels.

After His ascension Christ poured out His Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. This was the birthday of the church. The baptism of the Spirit did something God had never done before in history. It united believers with Christ in a new relationship as fellow members of the spiritual body of Christ (John 14:17). Believers then shared the life of Christ in a way never before experienced. God united them with Him. The same Spirit of God that indwelt Him now indwells us. The unity of the church is not external: what we believe (creeds), how we organize ourselves (polity), where we meet (culture), etc. It is internal: who indwells us. The basis of our unity in the church goes back to the origin of the church. It began when the Holy Spirit first baptized believers on the day of Pentecost (1 Cor. 12:13; Rom. 8:9).

The second major revelation of the church that we receive in Acts concerns the nature of the church. The church is one with Jesus Christ. That is its nature. It shares one life with its risen Lord.

In Luke's Gospel our writer presented Jesus Christ as the Head of a new race. As Adam was the head of one race, Christ is the last Adam, the Head of a new race. As Adam was the first man, Christ is the second man, the Head of a new race. As the First-born from the dead, Christ is the Head of a new race.

In Acts we see the new race springing from the First-born from the dead. We see the brotherhood of which Christ is the elder Brother. We see the body growing of which Christ is the Head. The spiritual bonds that unite the members of Christ's race are stronger than the physical bonds that unite the members of Adam's race (Matt. 12:47-50). The members of the new race are feeble, faulty, and foolish, but they possess the life of Christ. Christ is manifesting His life through those who have become partakers of His life by Holy Spirit baptism. The nature of the church is that it is one organic whole empowered by the life of Christ. The Holy Spirit has joined us organically to Christ.

The third major revelation of the church that Acts gives us concerns the function of the church. The function of the church is to be the instrument of Jesus Christ, His hands and feet and mouth, to carry out His will in the world. What is the will of Christ? Let me point out three things that Acts emphasizes.

The will of God is the imparting of life where there is death. Jesus Christ ministers divine life through His human instruments. We see Peter, Paul, and all God's other servants in Acts, doing the same kinds of things Jesus did when He walked this earth. They even did the same types of miracles. Christ by His Spirit was working through them (1:1-2). References to their being filled with the Spirit reflect Christ's control of these people as His instruments. He wants to impart life through us too.

The will of God is also the manifestation of light where there is darkness. The light of the gospel shines through Spirit filled believers to bring the lost into the light of God's presence. In Acts we see Christ through the Holy Spirit choosing the persons to whom the gospel would go. We see Him indicating the places where the gospel would reach. We see Him initiating the processes by which the gospel would penetrate the darkness caused by Satan. This is what Christ wants to do today too. He wants to manifest light through us.

Third, the will of God is the production of love where there is apathy, bitterness, and hatred. Christ's love reaches through believers, His instruments, by the Holy Spirit. It produces in the believer love for the Lord, love for the brethren, and love for the world. We see this illustrated in Acts. This is what Christ wants to do through us: produce love.

In summary, these are three great revelations of the church in Acts. As to its origin, Jesus Christ created it (Matt. 16:18). As to its nature, the church is one with Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). As to its function, the church is the instrument of Christ. Rom. 6:13 says, "Present yourselves to God . . . and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."

Acts also warns us of three major antagonists facing the church.

The first of these is prejudice. Prejudice means prejudging, judging on the basis of limited information.

The outstanding example of this type of opposition in Acts is the unbelieving Jews. They refused to accept the witness of the Christians. They would not tolerate the evidence the Christians presented. They became the major enemies of the church as well as missing the blessings that could have been theirs if they had acknowledged their Messiah. The church faces the same opposition today (e.g., traditional concepts as opposed to Scriptural revelation).

The root cause of this problem is lack of confidence in the Holy Spirit. Prejudice says, "I do not trust what the Holy Spirit has said in Scripture." We must always interpret experience in the light of revelation, not the other way around.

The second antagonist the church faces that Acts identifies is personal interests. By this I mean the desire for something other than the will of God.

There are several examples of this peril in Acts. Ananias and Sapphira wanted a reputation for spirituality as well as spirituality. Simon Magus wanted a supernatural gift for personal glory as well as for the glory of God. Our flesh also tempts us to serve ourselves as well as God. This is compromise.

The root cause of this problem seems to me to be lack of passive yielding to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit does not fill or control us. We are doubleminded.

A third antagonist the church faces that we also see in Acts is pride.

Two men provide perhaps the outstanding examples of this peril: Felix and Agrippa. Their desire for personal prestige determined their response to God's will. Many a person's career goals and ego needs have limited God's use of him.

The cause of this problem is lack of active obedience to the Holy Spirit. When the Spirit through His Word says "Do this," and we refuse, it is because we set our wills against His. That is pride. We need to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God. In chapter 10 Peter said, "Not me, Lord."

These are three major perils to the church corporately as well as to Christians individually. Luke has warned us of them in Acts. They are major obstacles to Christ's building His church in the world.

Acts also presents three major lessons for the church that it should always keep in view.

First, the church's passion must be the glory of God. This was the driving motive in the lives of Peter, Paul, and the other faithful missionaries and witnesses that Luke recorded in this book. Their passion was not their own personal safety or their physical comfort, or the opportunity to relieve the sufferings of others, or the desire to create better living conditions in the world. They subordinated all these to God's glory in their hearts. We too must commit ourselves to glorifying God above everything else personally and corporately. My goal for this course is that it will glorify God.

Second, the church's governing principle must be loyalty to Christ. Again, the leaders of the early church modelled this for us. They put Christ's interests before their own. They were singleminded in their living. This is the evidence of their being filled with the Spirit. Their primary commitment was to letting His life work in and through them, and to carrying out His work, not their own. How loyal are we to Christ individually and corporately? John the Baptist said, "He must increase, but I must decrease."

Third, the church's power must be the Holy Spirit. The constant references to prayer in Acts show us how conscious the early Christians were of their dependence on God's power. They did not go out in self-confidence but in God-confidence. They called on Him to reveal Christ's life in and through them (4:24-30). They called on Him to direct Christ's works in and through them (12:12; 20:36). We must not only be obedient and yielded to the Holy Spirit but also dependent on Him because He is our power individually and corporately (John 15:5). I'll be praying for you this semester. Please pray for me.

Finally I would like to leave you with three challenges that grow out of the emphases of Acts.

First, what is your motivation? Why do you do what you do? What motivated the Spirit filled believers in Acts was the desire that God get the glory above everything else. Who do you want to get the credit for what you do?

Second, what is your method? How do you do what you do? Our models in Acts cooperated with God so Christ could work through them by His Holy Spirit. This involved having confidence in His revelation, yielding to His will, obeying His Word, and depending on His Holy Spirit.

Third, what is your emphasis? What do you do? In Acts the leaders of the church gave priority to what is most important to God, not to what was most important to them personally. Furthermore they emphasized the essentials, not the incidentals. Let's not get so fascinated with the incidentals, such as how God manifested His power (healings, speaking in tongues, etc.), that we fail to give priority to the essentials. One essential is that He is powerful enough to do anything to accomplish His purposes. Let's give ourselves to the task before us wholeheartedly and enthusiastically (Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).

Constable: Acts (Outline)

Outline

I. The witness in Jerusalem 1:1-6:7

A. The founding of the church 1:1-2:46

1. The resumptive preface to the book 1:1-5

2. The command to witness 1:6-8

3. The ascension of Jesus 1:9-11

4. Jesus' appointment of a twelfth apostle 1:12-26

5. The birth of the church 2:1-41

6. The early state of the church 2:42-46

B. The expansion of the church in Jerusalem 3:1-6:7

1. External opposition 3:1-4:31

2. Internal compromise 4:32-5:11

3. Intensified external opposition 5:12-42

4. Internal conflict 6:1-7

II. The witness in Judea and Samaria 6:8-9:31

A. The martyrdom of Stephen 6:8-8:1a

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8-7:1

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53

3. Stephen's death 7:54-8:1a

B. The ministry of Philip 8:1b-40

1. The evangelization of Samaria 8:1b-25

2. Philip's ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch 8:26-40

C. The mission of Saul 9:1-31

1. Saul's conversion and calling 9:1-19a

2. Saul's initial conflicts 9:19b-30

3. The church at peace 9:31

III. The witness to the uttermost part of the earth 9:32-28:31

A. The extension of the church to Syrian Antioch 9:32-12:24

1. Peter's ministry in Lydda and Joppa 9:32-43

2. The conversion of Cornelius 10:1-11:18

3. The initiatives of the Antioch church 11:19-30

4. The persecution of the Jerusalem church 12:1-24

B. The extension of the church to Cyprus and Asia Minor 12:25-16:5

1. The divine appointment of Barnabas and Saul 12:25-13:3

2. The mission to Cyprus 13:4-12

3. The mission to Asia Minor 13:13-14:25

4. Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch of Syria 14:26-28

5. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35

6. The strengthening of the Gentile churches 15:36-16:5

C. The extension of the church to the Aegean shores 16:6-19:20

1. The call to Macedonia 16:6-10

2. The ministry in Macedonia 16:11-17:15

3. The ministry in Achaia 17:16-18:17

4. The beginning of ministry in Asia 18:18-22

5. The results of ministry in Asia 18:23-19:20

D. The extension of the church to Rome 19:21-28:31

1. Ministry on the way to Jerusalem 19:21-21:16

2. Ministry in Jerusalem 21:17-23:32

3. Ministry in Caesarea 23:33-26:32

4. Ministry on the way to Rome 27:1-28:15

5. Ministry in Rome 28:16-31

Constable: Acts

Acts

Bibliography

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondswroth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

Alexander, Joseph Addison. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Alexander, L. C. A. "Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing." Novum Testamentum 18 (1986):48-74.

Allen, Roland. Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Ours? 2nd American ed., Chicago, Moody Press, 1959.

Allis, Oswald T. Prophecy and the Church. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1945.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Regency Reference Library, 1982.

Ballance, M. The Site of Derbe: A New Inscription. Anatolian Studies series. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankora, 1957.

Bammel, Ernst. "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 357-64. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Barclay, William. The Acts of the Apostles. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barker, Kenneth L. "The Scope and Center of Old and New Testament Theology and Hope." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 293-328. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Barnhouse, Donald G. God's River. Vol. IV in Exposition of Bible Doctrines. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Barrett, C. K. "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15.29." Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):50-59.

_____. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994.

_____. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents. New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bauckham, Richard. "James and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 415-80. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bellshaw, William G. "The Confusion of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-June 1963):145-53.

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. 4th revised ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

Blaiklock, E. M. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. London: Tyndale Press, 1959; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

Blaising, Craig. A. "The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants Through Jesus Christ." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Kingdom of God in the New Testament." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 232-83. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bock, Darrell L. "Evidence from Acts." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 181-98. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

_____. "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):146-54.

_____. "The Reign of the Lord Christ." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 37-67. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

_____. "A Theology of Luke-Acts." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 87-166. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Boice, James Montgomery. Foundations of the Christian Faith. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Bruce, F. F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 68:2 (Spring 1986):273-95.

_____. Commentary on The Book of Acts. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

_____. "The Church of Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):641-61.

_____. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Paul's Apologetic and the Purpose of Acts." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 39:2 (Spring 1987):379-93.

Brunner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1953.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Burton, Ernest DeWitt. "The Politarchs." American Journal of Theology 2 (1898):598-632.

Butcher, J. Kevin. "A Critique of The Gospel According to Jesus." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1 (Spring 1989):27-43.

Cadbury, Henry J. The Book of Acts in History. London: Black, 1955.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vols. XXI and XXII in The Library of Christian Classics. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Donald K. "Paul's Ministry at Ephesus--A Devotional Study." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:472 (October-December 1961):304-10.

Capper, Brian. "The Palestinian Cultural Context of Earliest Christian Community of Goods." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 323-56. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Carroll, J. Response to the End of History: Eschatology and Situation in Luke-Acts. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

Carson, Donald A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton: University Press, 1971.

Catalog of Oral Roberts University. Tulsa, Ok: Oral Roberts University, 1973.

Chafer, Lewis S. Grace. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1922.

_____. He That Is Spiritual. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1819.

_____. Salvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1917.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-48.

Chase, F. H. The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles. London: Macmillan Co., 1902.

Cocoris, G. Michael. Evangelism: A Biblical Approach. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

_____. "John MacArthur, Jr's, System of Salvation: An Evaluation of the Book, The Gospel According to Jesus." Glendora, CA: By the Author, 1989.

_____. Lordship Salvation--Is It Biblical? Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1983.

Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1-3)? Patristic Exegesis, Rabbinic Law, and Matrilineal Descent." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:2 (June 1986):251-68.

Cole, Dan P. "Corinth & Ephesus." Bible Review 4:6 (December 1988):20-30.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Criswell, W. A. Acts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Crocker, Piers T. "The City of Meroe and the Ethiopian Eunuch." Buried History 22:3 (September 1986):53-72.

Croy, N. Clayton. "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts 17:18, 32)." Novum Testamentum 39:1 (1997):21-39.

Culver, Robert Duncan. "Apostles and the Apostolate in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):131-43.

Dalman, Gustaf H.. The Words of Jesus. Translated by D. M. Kay. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909.

Dana, H. E., and Mantey, Julius R. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1955.

Darby, John Nelson. Meditations on the Acts of the Apostles. London: G. Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Dean, David A. "A Study of the Enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 and 3." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Deissmann, Adolf. Light From the Ancient East. Revised ed. Translated by Lionel R. M. Strachan. Grand Rapids: Baker Book Houst, 1965.

_____. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by William E. Wilson. Harper Torchbook ed. New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1957.

deSilva, David A. "Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:4 (December 1995):549-64.

_____. "Paul's Sermon in Antioch of Pisidia." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):32-49.

Detwiler, David F. "Paul's Approach to the Great Commission in Acts 14:21-23." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):33-41.

de Waard, J. A. A Comparative Study of the Old Testament Text in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1965.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by Kirsopp Lake.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. C. Headham.

_____. S.v. "The Chronology of the New Testament," by C. H. Turner.

_____. S.v. "Temple," by W. T. Davies.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

"Doctrinal Statement of Dallas Theological Seminary." Dallas Theological Seminary 1988-89 Catalog.

Documents of the Christian Church. Edited by Henry Bettenson. Second ed. London, Oxford, and New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Dodd, C. H. According to the Scriptures. London: Nisbet, 1952.

Dunn, James D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1983.

English, E. Schuyler. "Was St. Peter Ever in Rome?" Bibliotheca Sacra 124:496 (October-December 1967):314-20.

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks series. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Falk, Daniel K. "Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 267-301. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Feldman, Louis H. "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):58-63.

Fiensy, David A. "The Composition of the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 213-36. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Finegan, Jack. The Archaeology of the New Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. Moffat New Testament Commentary series. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1931; reprint ed. 1960.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. and Lake, Kirsopp. The Acts of the Apostles. Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity, vols. 4 and 5. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Tustin, Cal.: Ariel Ministries Press, 1989.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Acts of the Apostles: An Exposition. New York: Our Hope, 1912.

_____. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Paul's Areopagus Speech." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:508 (October-December 1970):308-12.

Gentry, K. L. "The Great Option: A Study of the Lordship Controversy." Baptist Reformation Review 5 (1976):49-79.

Gerlach, Joel C. "Glossolalia." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 70:4 (October 1973):233-61.

Gill, David W. J. "Acts and Roman Policy in Judaea." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 15-26. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Goodspeed, Edgar J. "Gaius Titius Justus." Journal of Biblical Literature 69:4 (December 1950):382-83.

Grant, F. W. The Numerical Bible. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, n.d.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by R. McL. Wilson. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971.

Harm, Frederick R. "Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts." Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):28-41.

Harnack, Adolph. The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels. Translated by J. R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1911.

_____. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity. 2 vols. Translated by J. Moffatt. London: Williams & Norgate, 1908.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Heater, Homer, Jr. "Evidence from Joel and Amos." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 147-64. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Helyer, Larry R. "Luke and the Restoration of Israel." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):317-29.

Hengel, Martin. "The Geography of Palestine in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 27-78. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Herodotus. 4 vols. With an English translation by A. D. Godley. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Hesner, Colin. "The Name of Felix Again." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (October 1987):45-49.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. "A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 167-80. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Gospel Under Seige. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September 1963):226-33.

_____. Review of "A Review of The Gospel According to Jesus, by Darrell L. Bock in Bibliotheca Sacra, January-March 1989, pp. 21-40." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1(Spring 1989):79-83.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ. Grand Rapid: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

_____. "Chronology of the Apostolic Age." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1965.

_____. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Homer. The Odyssey. 2 vols. With an English translation by A. T. Murray. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1946.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

Horsley, Richard A. "High Priests and the Politics of Roman Palestine." Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:1 (June 1986):23-55.

Ice, Thomas D. "Dispensational Hermeneutics." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 29-49. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. T. Robertson.

Ironside, Harry A. Except Ye Repent. New York: American Tract Society, 1937.

_____. Lectures on the Book of Acts. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Translated by F. H. and C. H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.

_____. "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-13.

Jewett, Robert A. A Chronology of Paul's Life. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Jewish Encyclopedia. S. v. "Alexandrians in Jerusalem," by Emil Schürer.

Johnson, Elliott E. "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalm 110." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:596 (October-December 1992):428-37.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

_____. "How Faith Works." Christianity Today 33:13 (September 22, 1989):21-25.

Jones, A. H. M. Studies in Roman Government and Law. New York: Praeger, 1960.

Jones, Bruce. "Real Repentance." Moody Monthly 88:2 (October 1987):21-23.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Back Toward the Future: Hints for Interpreting Biblical Prophecy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. Jerusalem to Rome. New Testament Studies series. Brethren Missionary Herald, 1972; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House and BMH Books, 1985.

Ladd, George E. "Acts." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1123-78. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 9: John--Acts, by J. P. Lange and Gotthard Victor Lechler. Translated by Philip Schaff and Charles F. Schaeffer.

Larkin, William J., Jr. "The Recovery of Luke-Acts as Grand Narrative' for the Church's Evangelistic and Edification Tasks in a Postmodern Age." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):405-15.

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1909.

Lawrence, William D. "The New Testament Doctrine of the Lordship of Christ." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.

Lawson, Steven J. "The Priority of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study of Acts 2:42-47." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):198-217.

Légasse, Simon. "Paul's Pre-Christian Career according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 365-90. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Levinskaya, Irena. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. Vol. 5 of The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, edited by Bruce W. Winter. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1996.

Lewellen, Thomas G. "Has Lordship Salvation Been Taught throughout Church History?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March 1990):54-68.

Lightner, Robert P. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. 2nd ed. Schaumburg, Il: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Longenecker, Richard N.. "The Acts of the Apostles." In John-Acts. Vol. 9 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

_____. Paul, Apostle of Liberty. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

Lumby, J. Rawson. The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1885.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1988.

_____. Justification by Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

Macartney, Clarence E. N. Paul the Man. Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1961.

MacLennan, Robert S. and A. Thomas Kraabel. "The God-Fearers--A Literary and Theological Invention." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):46-53.

Maile, John F. "The Ascension in Luke-Acts." Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986):29-59.

Malina, Bruce J. "Religion' in the World of Paul." Biblical Theology Bulletin 16:3 (July 1986):92-101.

Malphurs, Aubrey M. "A Theological Critique of the Churches of Christ Doctrine of Soteriology." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manek, Jindrich. "The New Exodus in the Books of Luke." Novum Testamentum 2 (1957):8-23.

Manson, T. W. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Edited by Matthew Black. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. "Acts and the Former Treatis.'" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 163-182. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

_____. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Mason, Steve. "Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 115-77. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Winona Lake, In.: BMH Books, 1974.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena: Thru the Bible Radio, 1983.

McGrath, Alister E. "Apologetics to the Romans." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:620 (October-December 1998):387-93.

McIntyre, Luther B., Jr. "Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:609 (January-March 1996):53-62.

McLean, John A. "Did Jesus Correct the Disciples' View of the Kingdom?" Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):215-27.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Willilams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Meisner, Donald R. "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's Missionary Sermons." S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, 1974.

_____. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications." In Perspectives on Luke-Acts, pp. 199-214. Edited by Charles H. Talbert. Danville, Va: Association of Baptist Professors of Religion, 1978.

Merrill, Eugene H. "Paul's Use of About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.

Metzger, Bruce M. "St. Paul and the Magicians." Princeton Seminary Bulletin 38 (1944):27-30.

Meyer, F. B. Paul: A Servant of Jesus Christ. London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Moore, Thomas S. "To the End of the Earth': The Geographical and Ethnic Univarsalism of Acts 1:8 in Light of Isaianic Influence on Luke." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):389-99.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Acts of the Apostles. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1924; reprint ed., London: Pickering and Inglis, 1965.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Moule, C. F. D. "Once More, Who Were the Hellenists?" Expository Times 70 (October 1958-September 1959):100-2.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. "The Cenacle--Topographical Setting for Acts 2:44-45." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 303-22. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

_____. "On the Road and on the Sea with St. Paul." Bible Review 1:2 (Summer 1985):38-47.

Murray, George W. "Paul's Corporate Evangelism in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):189-200.

Murray, John. Redemption--Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

"Must Christ be Lord to be Savior?" Eternity, September 1959, pp. 14-18, 36-37, 48.

Neil, William, The Acts of the Apostles. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1973; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1981.

The New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Cilicia," by E. M. B. Green.

_____. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Judas Iscariot," by R. P. Martin.

The New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelien, William Culbertson, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

The New Testament in Modern English. Translated by J. B. Phillips. New York: Macmillan Co., 1958.

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. First series. Edited by Philip Schaff. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

O'Connor, E. D. The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1971.

Orr, J. Edwin. The Fervent Prayer: The Worldwide Impact of the Great Awakening of 1858. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

O'Toole, Robert F. "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost." Journal of Biblical Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.

Packer, James I. Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 1961.

Palmer, D. W. "The Literary Background of Acts 1.1-14." New Testament Studies 33:3 (July 1987):427-38.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Peterson, David. "The Motif of Fulfilment and Purpose of Luke-Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 83-104. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Philostratus. The Life of Appollonius. 2 vols. With an English translation by F. C. Conybeare. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: London: William Heinemann, and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1921.

Pink, Arthur W. Studies on Saving Faith. Swengel, Pa: Reiner Publications, n.d.

Pocock, Michael. "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Pollock, A. J. The Apostle Paul and His Missionary Labors. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Praeder, Susan Marie. "The Problem of First Person Narration in Acts." Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):193-218.

Price, J. Randall. "Prophetic Postponement in Daniel 9 and Other Texts." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 133-65. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Rackham, Richard Belward. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster Commentaries series. 9th ed. London: Methuen and Co., 1922.

Ramm, Bernard. Rapping about the Spirit. Waco: Word Books, 1974.

Ramsay, William M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953.

_____. The Church in the Roman Empire. 3rd ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1894.

_____. Pictures of the Apostolic Church. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1910.

_____. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1897; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960.

Reinhardt, Wolfgang. "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the Numerical Growth of the Jerusalem Church" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 237-65. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Richard, Ramesh. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Riesner, Rainer. "Synagogues in Jerusalem." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 179-211. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Roberts, C.; Skeat, T. C.; and Nock, A. D. "The Guild of Zeus Hypsistos." Harvard Theological Review 29 (1936):39-88.

Robertson, Archibald, and Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March):71-84.

_____. "The Davidic Covenant in the Gospels." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):458-78.

Rosner, Brian S. "Acts and Biblical History." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 65-82. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Ross, Bob L. Acts 2:38 and Baptismal Regeneration. Pasadena, TX.: Pilgrim Publications, 1976.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):360-64.

Russell, Walt. "The Anointing with the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts." Trinity Journal 7NS (Spring 1986):47-63.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Acts of the Apostles. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1961.

_____. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The Christian and Civil Disobedience." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):153:62.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):243.

_____. So Great Salvation. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . . Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sanders, John. "Inclusivism." In What about Those Who Have Never Heard? Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, pp. 21-55. Edited by John Sanders. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Sarles, Ken L. "All Power & Signs." Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):8-11.

_____. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "The Presence of the Kingdom and the Life of the Church." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1987):30-46.

Schwartz, Joshua. "Peter and Ben Stada in Lydda." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 391-414. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Scofield, C. I. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth. 1896; reprint ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979.

Sherrill, John. They Shall Speak with Other Tongues. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1964.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1848.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1955.

Stewart, James S. A Man in Christ. Reprint ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1964.

Stonehouse, Ned. "The Gift of the Holy Spirit." Westminster Theological Journal 13 (1949-51):1-15.

Stott, John R. W. Basic Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Message of Acts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990.

Strabo. Geography. 8 vols. With an English translation by Horace Leonard Jones. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Strom, Mark R. "An Old Testament Background to Acts 12. 20-23." New Testament Studies 32:2 (April 1986):289-92.

Suetonius. "The Deified Claudius." In The Lives of the Caesars. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. The Loeb Classical Lubrary. Cambridge, Mass.: and London: Harvard University Press, 1939.

Swindoll, Charles. "Dallas's New Dispensation." Christianity Today, October 25, 1993, pp. 14-15.

Sylva, Dennis D. "The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):261-75.

Tacitus. The Histories. The Loeb Classical Library series. Translated by Clifford H. Moore. London: William Heinemann Ltd., New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1931.

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

_____. Luke and the Gnostics. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation. Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Tannenbaum, Robert F. "Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphradite." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):54-57.

Tanton, Lanny T. "The Gospel and Water Baptism: A Study of Acts 2:38." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 3:1 (Spring 1990):27-52.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "kyrios," by Werner Foerster.

_____. S.v. "pneuma . . .," by Eduard Schweizer.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. The Acts of the Apostles: Outline Studies in Primitive Christianity. Chicago: Bible Institute Colportage Association, n.d.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "Acts." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 349-432. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Contingency of the Coming of the Kingdom." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 222-37. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Treier, Daniel J. "The Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple-Lens Approach." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:1 (March 1997):13-26.

Trites, Allison A. "Church Growth in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):162-73.

Unger, Merrill F. "Archaeology and Paul's Visit to Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:470 (April-June 1961):107-12.

_____. The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit. Chicago: Scripture Press, 1953.

_____. "Historical Research and the Church at Thessalonica." Bibliotheca Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):38-44.

_____. "Pisidian Antioch and Gospel Penetration of the Greek World." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:469 (January-March 1961):46-53.

_____. "The Significance of Pentecost." Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-June 1965):169-77.

_____. Zechariah. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. Edited by Merrill F. Unger. 1957 ed. S.v. "Herod," by S. L. Bowman.

van Ommeren, Nicholas M. "Was Luke an Accurate Historian? Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):57-71.

van Unnik, W. C. Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth. Translated by G. Ogg. London: Epworth, 1962.

Walvoord, John F. "The Ascension of Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481 (January-March 1964):3-12.

_____. "Biblical Kingdoms Compared and Contrasted." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 75-91. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Holy Spirit at Work Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1973.

_____. Jesus Christ Our Lord. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

Warfield, Benjamin B. Counterfeit Miracles. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1918; reprint ed., London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1972.

Weinert, Francis D. "Luke, Stephen, and the Temple in Luke-Acts." Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:3 (July 1987):88-90.

Wenham, John. "The Identification of Luke." Evangelical Quarterly 63:1 (1991):3-44.

Wilkin, Robert N. "An Exegetical Evaluation of the Perseverance of the Saints." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1982.

_____. "Did H. A. Ironside Teach Commitment Salvation?" Grace Evangelical Society News 4:6 (June 1989):1, 3.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 1:1 (Autumn 1988):11-20; 2:1 (Spring 1989):13-26.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation: A Key Gospel Issue." Grace Evangelical Society News 3:6 (June-July 1988):3.

Williams, Ernest Swing. Systematic Theology. 3 vols. Springfield, Mo: Gospel Publishing House, 1953.

Williams, Margaret H. "Palestinian Jewish Personal Names in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 79-113. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Wimber, John. Power Evangelism. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1986.

Winter, B. W. "Providentia for the Widows of 1 Timothy 5:3-16." Tyndale Bulletin 39 (1988):93-99.

Woodbridge, Charles J. A Study of the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1955.

Zimmerman, Charles. "To This Agree the Words of the Prophets." Grace Journal 4:3 (Fall 1963):28-40.

Zuck, Roy B. "Cheap Grace?" Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):4-7.

_____. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Zweck, Dean W. "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17." Lutheran Theological Journal 21:3 (December 1987):111-22.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

INTRODUCTION.

St. Luke, who had published his gospel, wrote also a second volume, which, from the first ages, hath been called the Acts of the Apostles. Not that we can look upon this work, as a history of what was done by all the apostles, who were dispersed in different nations; but we have here a short view of the first establishment of the Christian Church, a small part of St. Peter's preaching and actions, set down in the first twelve chapters, and a more particular account of St. Paul's apostolical labours, in the following chapters, for about thirty years, till the year 63, and the 4th year of Nero, where these acts end. (Witham) --- St. Luke, after giving us the history of the life, actions, miracles, sufferings, and instructions of Jesus Christ, in his gospel, here give us the life and actions of the apostles, the primitive Christians, and particularly all that relates to St. Paul, by way of an appendix. And what could he give more useful or more important to the Church, whether we consider the noble examples he offers for our imitation, or the excellent lessons for our improvement in spiritual wisdom? He describes in this book the accomplishment of many things that had been predicted by Jesus Christ, the descent of the Holy Ghost, the prodigious change effected in the minds and hearts of the apostles: we behold here the model of Christian perfection, in the lives of the first Christians, and the practice of the most eminent virtues, in the conduct of the blessed apostles; the miraculous operations of the holy Spirit, in the conversion of the Gentiles, and this wonder of wonders, the foundation of the holy Catholic Church, the establishment of the spiritual kingdom of God promised through all the inspired oracles, and the daily addition which the Lord made to his Church, of such as should be saved. (chap. 2. ver. 47. and chap. xv. ver. 5.) --- St. Luke has entitled this work, the Acts of the Apostles, that we may seek therein, says St. John Chrysostom, (tom. 5. hom. xii.) not so much the miracles that the apostles performed, as their good deeds, and eminent virtues. In appearing to give us a simple history, says St. Jerome, this holy physician furnishes us with as many remedies, to cure the maladies of our souls, as he gives us words for our instruction. (Ep. 103.) --- It is thought, that his principal design was to oppose to the false acts of the apostles, that were then in circulation, a true and authentic history of the actions of St. Peter and St. Paul. The Catholic Church has ever held this work in such great esteem, that it has not only superseded every pretended history of the kind, that preceded it, but also every ascititious one that has succeeded it. (St. Augustine, de consen. Evang. lib. iv. chap. 8.) --- It is very probable, that St. Luke wrote his acts at Rome, whilst he was near St. Paul, during the time of his confinement, for he remained with him till his deliverance. There can be no doubt that the work was written in Greek, and in a more pure and polished style, than we find in any other writings of the New Testament. St. Luke generally cites the Septuagint, apparently because he was ignorant of the Hebrew; and because, St. Paul more frequently having to preach to the Gentiles, preferred citing the sacred text in the language known in common, sooner than in Hebrew, which was understood by few. See St. Jerome, in Isai. vi. and again, tradit. Hebr. in Genes. 45. --- The Catholic Church has ever admitted this book into the canon of Scriptures; though many heretics, says St. Augustine, have rejected it. (ep. 253. and lib. de util. cred. 7.) St. John Chrysostom, (hom. i. in Acta) complains, that this book, in his time, was not sufficiently attended to, which he esteems as no less useful than the gospel itself. Erasmus, in his preface to the Acts, says, that he had, in the first instance, some notion of adding this book to St. Luke's gospel, as they are both addressed to the same person, and the Acts are not inconsiderable part of the sacred history; for, as the gospel shews the seed committed to the earth, and sown in the field, the Acts represent it as taking root, shooting up, and producing its fruit. --- The Acts have not uniformly held the same place in the Testament which they hold at present. Sometimes this book was inserted immediately before the book of Revelation, as St. Augustine and others insinuate. At other times, we find it between the epistles of St. Paul and the canonical epistles. Some persons express their surprise, that St. Luke, who was the inseparable companion of St. Paul, has not given the account of St. Paul's martyrdom. St. John Chrysostom (hom. i. in Acta) gives an excellent solution: "the apostles, and other apostolic men, wrote little, but did a great deal." The martyrdom of St. Paul, that took place in the public theatre of Rome itself, and before the eyes of all the Christians of this capital of the world, could not remain unknown, but the voyages and other circumstances of his life, too useful to the Church to be suffered to pass into oblivion, called for the exertions of St. Luke's eloquent pen, which, though admirably accommodated to an historic design, is not wholly free from Hebraisms, and Syriacisms. The Acts of the Apostles include the history of the infant Church, from the day of our Lord's ascension into heaven, till the deliverance of St. Paul, two years after his arrival at Rome, i.e. a space of thirty years, from the year 33, to the year 63 of Jesus Christ, or from the 19th year of Tiberius, till the 9th year of Nero. This golden book paints, as it were, the face of the primeval Christian Church; it places before our eyes the singular providence of God, in founding and protecting his Church, and how the apostles, (in spite of every opposition of the armed power of the whole world, to oppress the gospel,) without any foreign assistance of learning, credit, power, or expectation of any temporal advantages, but relying solely on the power of truth, and the virtue of the holy Spirit, laboured in the propagation of the faith, without intermission, till the power of God, under the ignominy of the cross, became eventually triumphant. See Wm. Whitfield Dakins, LL.D. in his prolegomena. --- It may be divided into four parts. In the first eight chapters, St. Luke gives the origin and progress of the Christian Church among the Jews. From the 9th to the 16th, he shews how widely it was spread among the Gentiles: from the 16th to the 20th, the diverse peregrinations of St. Paul, till his last journey to Jerusalem: and from the 20th to the end, with what patience he underwent innumerable sufferings, trials, and indignities, with what magnanimity he had head against the violent surges of persecution, and his astonishing equanimity under every possible calamity. --- This account, which is not continued beyond his two years' imprisonment in Rome, contains a general sketch of the history of the Church during the epoch it describes of thirty years. The leading facts therein contained are, the choice of Matthias to be an apostles, in the room of Judas; the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost; the preaching, miracles, and sufferings of the apostles at Jerusalem; the conversion of St. Paul; the call of Cornelius, the first Gentile convert; the persecution of the Christians by Herod Agrippa; the preaching of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles, by the express command of the Holy Ghost; the decree made at Jerusalem, declaring that circumcision, and a conformity to other Jewish rites and ceremonies were not necessary in Gentile converts; the miraculous cures performed by the handkerchiefs and aprons which had only touched the body of St. Paul; whilst the latter part of the book is exclusively confined to the history of St. Paul, of whom, as we have already seen, St. Luke was the constant companion for several years. --- The place of its publication is doubtful. A learned prelate advances, that the probability appears to be in favour of Greece, though some contend for Alexandria, in Egypt. This latter opinion rests upon the subscriptions at the end of some Greek manuscripts, and of the copies of the Syriac version; but the best critics think, that these subscriptions, which are also affixed to other books of the New Testament, deserve but little weight; and in this case they are not supported by any ancient authority. But the sentiment of this learned prelate, does not bias the opinion we gave at the beginning, and which we find confirmed by Alban Butler, in his life of St. Luke, vol. x. p. 432. where he says, "that St. Luke attended St. Paul at Rome, whither he was sent prisoner from Jerusalem in 61. The apostle remained there two years in chains; but was permitted to live in a house which he hired, though under the custody of a constant guard; and there he preached to those who daily resorted to hear him. From ancient writings and monuments belonging to the Church of St. Mary in via lata, which is an ancient title of a Cardinal Deacon, Boronius, in his Annals ad. an. 55. and Arringhi, in his Roma Subterranea, lib. iii, chap. 41. tell us, that this Church was built upon the spot where St. Paul then lodged, and where St. Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles."

====================

Gill: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO ACTS

This book, in some copies, is called, "The Acts of the holy Apostles". It contains an history of the ministry and miracles of the apostles of Christ, and is a sort of a journal of their actions, from whence it takes its name. It begins at the ascension of Christ, and reaches to the imprisonment of the Apostle Paul at Rome; and is a history of upwards of thirty years: it gives an account of the first Gospel church at Jerusalem, and of the progress of the Gospel there, and in Judea, by the means of all the apostles, and particularly Peter, the minister of the circumcision, and who also first opened the door of faith to the Gentiles: it shows how the Gospel went forth from Jerusalem, and was spread in the Gentile world, especially by the Apostle Paul, whose companion Luke was, that was the writer of this book; for that it was written by him is very evident from the beginning of it, it being dedicated to the same person his Gospel is, and of which he makes mention; and in the Complutensian edition the book is called, "The Acts of the Apostles of Saint Luke the Evangelist"; and so the title of it in the Syriac version is, "the Book of the Acts: that is, the history of the blessed apostles, which my Lord Luke the Evangelist collected for the saints". It was by him written in the Greek language; and we are told ^a, that there was a version of it into the Hebrew language, and which was laid up in the library of the Jews at Tiberias; and is cited by R. Azarias ^b under the name of twlweph, "the Acts": of the authority of this book there has been no doubt, among the ancients, only Cerinthus the heretic endeavoured to discredit it; and it was not received by another sort of heretics called Severiani, from Severus, a disciple of Tatian ^c. It is a most excellent and useful work, showing the first planting of Christianity, and of Christian churches, both among the Jews and Gentiles; the spread and progress of the Gospel in several parts of the world; what sufferings the apostles endured for the sake of it; and with what patience and courage they bore them; and what success attended them; and is a standing proof and confirmation of the Christian religion.

College: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

As early as the second century the title "The Acts of the Apostles" was given to this document. Before that time the work probably circulated with its companion volume, "The Gospel of Luke." When the other three Gospels were collected and the New Testament was formed, The Gospel of Luke and The Acts of the Apostles were separated. Both were included in the New Testament as books of history.

AUTHORSHIP

Like the Third Gospel, the Book of Acts does not identify its author. Evidence must be gathered, therefore, from both within the document itself and from references to the document in early church history.

The strongest evidence within the Book of Acts is its Prologue (1:1-3). When the Prologue of Acts is compared with the Prologue of the Third Gospel (1:1-4), the similarities are striking. Both books mention the name Theophilus as the recipient. Acts refers to "the former book," implying that the Third Gospel is that book. Acts also intends to begin the story at the point that the Third Gospel ends it-the ascension of Christ. The style of Greek used in both cases is polished and formal. The implication that both works were written by the same author is unavoidable.

In addition, the passages in Acts which use the pronoun "we" imply an eyewitness account. Appearing toward the end of Acts, these passages give the impression that whoever was writing the book was also present when some of the recorded events took place. It seems that the author makes himself a companion of Paul at these points in the narrative (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). At other points in the record the author was content to use "they" in describing events.

Inevitably, then, the question of authorship focuses on Paul's traveling companions. Because some of the "we" sections overlap with Paul's years in prison at both Caesarea and Rome, the companions who were with him at that time become prime candidates. When Paul wrote the letters to Philemon and to the Colossians from prison, Luke was one of the companions Paul mentioned (Phlm 23-24; Col 4:10-17).

Another line of reasoning was proposed by W.K. Hobart in 1882. He analyzed the vocabulary of Acts and concluded that the language indicated that the author of Acts was a physician. This proposal did not survive the scrutiny of scholarship for long. By 1920 H.J. Cadbury offered a study which showed that much of the language which Hobart considered "technical" medical terminology was in use by such nonmedical writers as Josephus, Plutarch, and Lucian. The most that can be said for this evidence today is that the terminology of Acts is compatible with authorship by a person with a medical background.

These pieces of evidence are consistent with the external evidence. Though references to The Acts of the Apostles do not appear as early in the church fathers as do references to other books of the New Testament, they do appear nonetheless. Diognetus (A.D. 130) and The Didache (A.D. 140) allude to the work, as does The Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (A.D. 177), according to Eusebius. The latter source quotes the words of Stephen's prayer in which he asks that his accusers not have their sin charged against them ( Ecclesiastical History V.2). Similarly, Irenaeus (A.D. 180), Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190), Tertullian (A.D. 200), and Eusebius (A.D. 325) quote from Acts without naming their source.

In addition to this evidence, many early church writers refer to the Third Gospel as written by Luke. This is important since the internal evidence makes the author of the Third Gospel the same as the author of Acts. Such testimony comes from the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170). Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Jerome, on the other hand, speak directly of Acts as written by Luke.

Much attention has also been given to the sources used by Luke in writing Acts. Harnack was the primary scholar who promoted the position that underlying Acts are several sources. He argued that one could detect first an "Antioch" source, then a second source describing Paul's conversion, and finally a third source which contained the "Jerusalem Caesarean" tradition. This third source, he said, was actually two sources blended together, one more reliable than the other.

Harnack's proposals ran into trouble on a couple of counts. His approach seemed dominated by a rationalism which excised the miraculous from the text. In addition his theories about the parallels between the two "Jerusalem Caesarean" sources did not hold up under the scrutiny of Joachim Jeremias and others.

Another proposal regarding written sources for Acts came from C.C. Torrey. He argued that an Aramaic source was used in the composition of Acts 1-15, but absent from Acts 16-28. This argument was made on the basis of Semitisms which he found in these earlier chapters. Later scholars argued that these terms and phrases are best explained as coming from the Septuagint or the synagogue.

Also among the possible sources for Acts are oral traditions. C.J. Hemer lists dozens of passages which he thinks are best explained as deriving from reports passed along verbally to Luke.

In recent years scholars have been far more interested in Luke as a writer and theologian than as a compiler of sources. In some cases studies have concentrated on comparing Luke's style with other ancient writers.

With the work of Hans Conzelmann in 1953 the emphasis on Luke's theology as reflected in Acts became pronounced. This perspective continues to dominate scholarly discussions today. One problem with this perspective is that it frequently ignores or denies the value of Acts as a historical record of events in the early church.

DATE OF WRITING

Acts 1:1 indicates that Luke wanted Acts to serve as the second volume of a two-volume work. For this reason Acts must be dated at the same time or later than the Gospel of Luke. The earliest dates that scholars assign to Luke are in the late 50s. Festus had already ascended to power when Acts was written, an event which is dated in A.D. 60. These boundaries fix the earliest date for Acts.

The real question is how late can Acts be dated. Some radical Bible critics have dated Acts as late as A.D. 115-130. This date reduces the chances that Luke was the author. Many scholars fix the date between A.D. 70-80. The reasons often given for this date have to do with the subject matter of Luke's Gospel, especially Luke 21:5-38. In these verses Jesus speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem. His description is so vivid that many scholars believe Luke must have recorded it after the event had occurred in A.D. 70.

One question which must arise in discussing the date of Acts has to do with the last verses of the Book. Acts closes with a description of the Apostle Paul under house-arrest in Rome. He was taken there to stand trial before Caesar. The account ends by noting that he remained there "two whole years," preaching the gospel as he waited for his accusers to arrive. Tradition indicates that he was martyred in Rome during the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68). The question to be answered is whether Paul was martyred during this Roman imprisonment. If so, why didn't Luke record Paul's death in Acts? Is the absence of any word on Paul's death significant? Was Luke avoiding the issue in order to preserve his focus on the victorious progress of the church? If so, maybe Acts was meant to end at this point in the story. This would allow for Acts to be written later than the year of Paul's death. The date of writing could then be fixed somewhere between A.D. 70-80.

On the other hand, it may be that Luke does not record Paul's death because it had not occurred when he wrote Acts, meaning that the dating of Acts would be earlier. If Luke finished Acts before Paul's death occurred, the work must be dated somewhere in the early or mid 60s. Church tradition (especially Jerome and Eusebius) dates Paul's martyrdom in Rome around A.D. 67-68. Many scholars believe, however, that Paul was released from his house-arrest described in Acts 28. They argue that he resumed his missionary travels until the day he was once again arrested and taken to Rome. They also contend that the Pastoral letters (1, 2 Timothy and Titus) were written before this second imprisonment. If this is true, then Acts may have been written at the end of Paul's first imprisonment, or about A.D. 63.

THEME OF ACTS

Acts opens with a statement from Jesus which seems to set the tone for the entire work. Jesus promises the Apostles that they will receive power in the form of the Holy Spirit (see 1:8). He then tells them that they will be his "witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (NIV). This theme of being a witness for the gospel is carried throughout the Book of Acts. Consider the following verses in Acts:

1:22 - the replacement for Judas had to be a witness of Christ's resurrection

2:32 - Peter's sermon on Pentecost emphasized that the apostles were witnesses of the resurrection

3:15 - after healing the beggar Peter proclaimed the resurrected Christ and that the apostles were witnesses

4:20 - the apostles told the Jewish authorities they could not help proclaiming what they had seen and heard

5:32 - when the apostles were again persecuted they said they must obey God because they were witnesses along with the Holy Spirit

8:25 - Peter and John went to Samaria where they "testified and proclaimed the word of the Lord"

10:39 - Peter proclaimed to Cornelius that he was a witness to the ministry of Jesus

13:31 - Paul told the crowd in Pisidian Antioch that Jesus' followers had witnessed Christ's resurrection

22:15 - Ananias went to Paul with the message that Paul would be a witness to all men of what he had seen and heard

23:11 - God appeared to Paul encouraging him that he would testify in Rome concerning the Lord These references do not include the numerous passages in which individuals are found witnessing falsely (e.g., 6:13; 7:58; 24:1; 25:7).

As the witnesses for Christ carried the gospel toward the far reaches of the world, the church advanced everywhere. This theme is also important in Acts. The expansion of the church is presented in a historical context. Luke even dates some of the events in his record by using key Roman names and events as reference points (see 12:1, 19; 18:12; 23:24; 24:24; 25:1, 23).

As Acts 1:8 indicates, Luke shows how the gospel prevailed wherever it was proclaimed. In Jerusalem, huge numbers were baptized on the Day of Pentecost. Later, thousands were added (4:4), even though the believers were being persecuted by the Jewish authorities. Such incidents as the striking down of Ananias and Sapphira and the dissension over the ministry to Hellenistic widows did not slow down the rapid increase of converts to the gospel (5:14; 6:1,7).

Beyond the walls of Jerusalem, the gospel also found fertile ground for growth. After the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, the church in Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experienced peace and saw its numbers increasing (9:31). Peter's work in Lydda bore rich fruit (9:35) and his raising of Tabitha in Joppa brought many to believe in the Lord (9:42).

The ever-widening influence of the gospel was felt beyond Judea and Samaria as well. Antioch saw increasing numbers of believers, especially among the Gentile populations (11:21,24). The cities of southern Galatia felt the gospel's impact as Paul and Barnabas evangelized in places like Lystra, Iconium, and Derbe (see 14:1,21). Later, Paul and Silas revisited these cities and more growth came (see 16:5). On this same missionary journey Paul and Silas even crossed into Macedonia where the results were the same (see 17:12). The gospel continued to conquer hearts and minds for Christ with each passing day.

Through all of Luke's record, the role of the Holy Spirit is highlighted. From the Day of Pentecost when he was poured out (see 2:14ff), the Spirit was essential to God's purposes for the proclamation of the gospel. When the men were chosen to administer the benevolence to widows, Stephen was appointed because he was a man full of "faith and of the Holy Spirit" (see 6:5). In Samaria the new converts received a visit from the apostles who placed their hands on them, granting them the power of the Holy Spirit (see 8:17). This was a power which Simon the Sorcerer wanted to buy (see 8:18). Philip heard from the Spirit that he was to go to the chariot of the Ethiopian (see 8:29). While Peter was preaching to Cornelius, the Holy Spirit came on the listeners, interrupting Peter's address (see 10:44). Barnabas and Saul were first selected as missionaries at Antioch when the Spirit spoke to the church (see 13:2). Their travels were guided by the Holy Spirit (see 16:7) and in Ephesus Paul rebaptized believers who had not received the Spirit (see 19:1-7). When Paul addressed the Ephesian elders, he reminded them that they had become leaders because of the Spirit's ministry (see 21:28).

While Acts emphasizes that the apostles received the power of the Spirit (1:8), it also emphasizes how they used this power. They faithfully bore witness for Christ. Acts underscores the work of the apostles, or at least some of the apostles. Roughly speaking, Acts 1-12 focuses on the work of the Apostle Peter. His role in the choosing of a successor for Judas (see 1:15ff) and the preaching on the Day of Pentecost (see 2:14ff) open the book. Almost every chapter which follows contains some report on the work of Peter. He and John heal the lame man (see 3:1-10), and then stand before the Sanhedrin (see 4:1-22). He confronts Ananias and Sapphira (see 5:1-11) and Simon the Sorcerer (see 8:9-25). He experiences the vision which results in the preaching to Cornelius and the conversion of his family (see 10:9-48). He then defends his actions before the church leaders in Jerusalem (see 11:1-18). Finally, he miraculously escapes imprisonment by Herod (see 12:1-19).

With Acts 13 the spotlight shifts to the Apostle Paul. Paul and Barnabas are sent from Antioch as missionaries (see 13:2). Their report at the Jerusalem conference is crucial (see 15:12), and though they cannot agree about John Mark, a second missionary journey is undertaken by Paul and Silas (see 15:40). The second journey is followed immediately by a third (see 18:23), and then comes the account of Paul's tragic visit to Jerusalem and his arrest in the temple (see 21:30). The rest of the book describes the series of hearings Paul endures and his transport to Caesarea and on to Rome. Paul's ministry as a Roman prisoner is the focus of the final comment in Acts. For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ (28:30-31).

THE PURPOSE OF ACTS

For years scholars have puzzled over why Luke produced Acts. Comparing the opening of Acts with that of Luke's Gospel shows that a particular disciple named Theophilus was central to Luke's motives. Was he a new convert? Was he a wealthy patron? Was he an influential Christian? These questions have no obvious answer.

Luke implies in the opening of the gospel that he had carefully researched his material (see Luke 1:1-4). He was concerned to provide a proper sequence of events. He shows awareness of other accounts which have been written concerning Jesus.

One purpose often noted is a historical one. Luke wanted to provide a historical record of the events of Jesus' life and the progress of the first-century church. Though some scholars argue that his reasons had to do with his concerns about the return of Christ, it is possible that he saw the end of the age of the apostles coming. Perhaps Luke wanted a written record of the apostles' work in carrying on the ministry of Jesus.

The immediate purpose of Luke may be indicated in his words in the opening of the gospel. He tells Theophilus that he writes so that this believer will "know the certainty of the things" he had been taught (1:4). This comment may indicate that the two-volume work was meant for Christian instruction.

The apologetic value of Acts has often been noted. Some have wondered if Luke's work was intended to serve as a defense-brief for the Apostle Paul as he stood before Caesar. The problem with this suggestion is that Luke includes so much material that has nothing to do with Paul's defense. Why would he include the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of the Lord? Why would he focus on the Apostle Peter in the early chapters of Acts? Acts would be very tedious reading if the main purpose were a defense of Paul.

Nevertheless, it is true that much of Acts emphasizes that the believers posed no threat to the Roman empire. When the apostles are summoned before the Jerusalem authorities, their only crime is healing the lame man (see 3:1ff). When Stephen is martyred, his only fault is his zeal for the faith (see 6:8ff). Peter's imprisonment at the hands of Herod Agrippa I is due to no fault of the Apostle (see 12:1ff). Paul's hearing before Gallio is a matter of questions about the Jewish Law (see 18:12-16). The series of trials experienced by Paul repeatedly emphasizes his innocence (see 21:29; 23:29; 24:27; 25:19; 26:31). The cumulative effect of these statements establishes that the church was never any real threat to Caesar.

Beyond these purposes, Acts has a theological purpose. Luke intends to show how the apostles began the work Jesus initiated on the earth. Acts 1:1 describes Luke's Gospel as an account of "all that Jesus began to do and to teach." Acts intends to describe how the apostles continued this work of Jesus. The Gospel begins in Jerusalem and fans out over the whole Roman world to the Imperial City itself. The salvation of the Lord is, in Paul's language, "first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16). Acts records how God used human means to send out the divine message of salvation in Christ.

THE HISTORICITY OF ACTS

Concerning the historical accuracy of the Book of Acts modern scholarship appears to be at an impasse. Questions have been raised for years about Luke's account of events. Many of the questions have been aimed at the portrait of Paul which is presented in Acts. Since the days of F.C. Baur and the Tübingen school, the issue of how Paul is presented in Acts as compared with the Pauline letters has been prominent among scholars who study Acts. The result has been a series of scholars who cast doubts upon the historical accuracy of Acts.

Drawing much of this attention has been the relationship between Acts and Galatians. Especially important to scholars are such topics as the number of visits Paul made to Jerusalem, the description of the debate about circumcision, the matter of Paul's relationship to the other apostles, the position of Paul regarding the "apostolic decrees" (see 15:19-20), and other matters relating to Paul's association with the Jerusalem leaders. In addition questions have been raised about Paul's portrait in Acts as an apostle who would carry the decrees from church to church when he says nothing of them in his letters to some of the same churches. Also a problem is the fact that Acts is silent with regard to any of these letters Paul was addressing to the churches, even though he wrote during the very time covered in Acts. Beyond this strange silence is the other important event in Paul's ministry about which Acts is so quiet-the collection for the believers in Judea (see 1 Cor 16:1-4; Rom 15:23-33).

These differences have caused some scholars to speak of the "Lucan Paul" in contrast to the "Paul of the epistles." Another scholar explains the difference (in the tradition of Baur) by referring to the "Paulinism of Acts." Luke is viewed not as a historian recording events in the ministry of Paul, but as a theologian who carefully constructs a historical explanation of Paul even if it is at odds with historical reality. The Pauline speeches of Acts, in particular, are viewed as fabrications of Luke's theological genius, motivated by the need to present Paul in terms which agree with his own theological perspective.

For many scholars, then, Acts is regarded as so preoccupied with theological concerns as to render it suspect as a historical report of events in the life of the first-century church. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this skepticism was met with a wave of scholars who resisted such a pessimistic assessment of the historicity of Acts. Such scholars as James Smith, Henry Alford, J.B. Lightfoot, F.W. Farrar, R.B. Rackham, William Ramsay, Theodor Zahn, Adolf Harnack, Arthur McGiffert, C.C. Torrey, and H.J. Cadbury found more reasons for confidence in the historical value of Acts. The impact of Martin Dibelius, however, was decisive. His critical studies of Acts produced a significant trend toward the conclusion that Acts should be understood in terms of descriptive theology rather than history. Hans Conzelmann and Ernst Haenchen were instrumental in systematically applying the approach of Dibelius to the text of Acts. Thus a powerful stream of thought continues to influence scholars who study Acts for the purpose of clarifying the theological tendencies of early church teaching, while dismissing the historical contribution of the work.

These trends have been called into question in recent years by such scholars as F.F. Bruce, I.H. Marshall, Martin Hengel, and C.J. Hemer. But no consensus among scholars has been reached. To some extent, then, the study of Acts advances on two entirely different (if not always unrelated) tracks. Work goes on in the effort to understand the theological tendencies which shape Luke's production of the Book of Acts. At the same time other scholars look to historical and archaeological studies as potential sources for additional help in comprehending the contribution Acts makes to the historical picture of the emerging church of the first century.

Whenever scholars from the Restoration Movement have engaged in major studies of Acts, the issue of the historicity of the Book has been dominant. Alexander Campbell's Acts of the Apostles is largely a grammatical analysis of the text of Acts, but the historicity of Luke's work is assumed throughout. J.W. McGarvey's New Commentary on Acts of Apostles not only proceeds on the presupposition that Acts can be trusted as a historical representation of the events it records, but argues the point against such "infidel" scholars as Baur and Zeller. Another commentary was produced in 1896, this time by David Lipscomb. His work makes theology the primary focus, but once again the issue of the historical credibility of Acts is central.

More recent volumes have appeared which offer the same balance. H. Leo Boles produced his commentary in 1941, a study which follows in the same tradition. Don DeWelt's commentary appeared in 1958, and it is stamped with a devotional and didactic quality that makes the message of Acts practical for the believer, yet it never compromises on the assumption that Acts is reliable as a historical account. Finally, the work of Gareth Reese was pivotal. His New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts is from the very start a work which argues the case for the historicity of Acts. With full awareness of the challenges from the Bible critics, Reese builds his case for the credibility of Luke's account of these events.

In this commentary our approach is to appreciate the theological motivations of Luke's work while not rejecting this record as the most valuable source we have regarding the developing church. Our confidence does not rest entirely on the fact that Luke's abilities as a historian have proven to be convincing. We also believe in the promise of the Lord to direct his servant into all truth.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries:

Arrington, French. The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Boles, H.L. A Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1941.

Campbell, Alexander. Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1858.

Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles , trans. James Limburg, A. Thomas Kraabel, Donald Juel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.

Carter, C.W. and Ralph Earle. Acts of the Apostles . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959.

DeWelt, Don. Acts Made Actual . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1969.

Foster, Lewis. "Acts," in The NIV Study Bible . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

Harnack, Adolf. The Acts of the Apostles , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1909.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary , trans.Bassil Blackwell. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971.

Harrison, E.F. Interpreting Acts . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.

Lake, Kirsopp and H.J. Cadbury. The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 4. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.

Lipscomb, David. Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1896.

McGarvey, J.W. New Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . 2 Vols. in One. Cincinnati: Standard, 1892.

Marshall, I.H. The Acts of the Apostles , Tyndale Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Munck, Johannes. The Acts of the Apostles . The Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Pesch, Rudolf. Die Apostelgeschichte . Teilband I: Apg. 1-12. Zurich: Benziger, 1986.

Polhill, John. Acts . The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Reese, Gareth. New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1991.

Williams, C.S.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . Harper's New Testament Commentaries. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Special Studies:

Arrington, French. New Testament Exegesis: Examples . Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1977.

Barrett, C.K. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents . New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bassler, Jouette. Divine Impartiality: Paul and a Theological Axiom . Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982.

Beasley-Murray, George. Baptism in the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Behm, Johannes. "Glossa," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Beitzel, Barry. The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands . Chicago: Moody, 1985.

Blaiklock, E.M. "The Acts of the Apostles as a Document of First-Century History," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. Ward Gasque, Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Cadbury, H.J. "Roman Law and the Trial of Paul," in The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 5. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975.

. Style and Literary Method of Luke Part 1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920.

. The Making of Luke-Acts . New York: MacMillan, 1927.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.

. The Ancient Mariners . New York: Macmillan, 1959.

Conzelmann, Hans. The Theology of St. Luke , trans. G. Buswell. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.

Cottrell, Jack. Baptism: A Biblical Study . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1989.

Dahl, Nils. "The Story of Abraham in Luke-Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Davies, W.D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism . London: SPCK, 1958.

. The Gospel and the Land . Berkeley: University of California, 1974.

. Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come. Philadelphia: SBL, 1952.

Dibelius, Martin. "The Acts of the Apostles in the Setting of the History of Early Christian Literature," in Studies in the Acts of the Apostles , trans. M. Ling. London: SCM, 1956.

. "Paul on the Areopagus," Ibid.

Dunn, J.D.G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970.

. Jesus and His Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975.

Dupont, Jacques. The Salvation of the Gentiles: Essays on the Acts of the Apostles . New York: Paulist, 1967.

. The Sources of Acts: The Present Position , trans. Kathleen Pond. London: Darton, Longman, & Todd, 1964.

Easton, Burton. Early Christianity: The Purpose of Acts and Other Papers , ed. F.C. Grant. London: SPCK, 1955.

Ellis, E.E. Paul's Use of the Old Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985.

Enslin, Morton. Reapproaching Paul . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987.

Esler, Philip. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Filson, Floyd. "The Journey Motif in Luke-Acts," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. W.W. Gasque and Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament . London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1971.

Flew, R.N. Jesus and His Church: A Study of the Idea of the Ecclesia in the New Testament . London: Epworth, 1943.

Gärtner, Bertil. The Areopagus Speech and Natural Revelation . Uppsala: Gleerup, 1955.

Gasque, Ward. A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles . Tübingen: Mohr, 1975.

Gaston, Lloyd. No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance of the Fall of Jerusalem in the Synoptic Gospels . Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970.

Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

Goulder, M.D. Type and History in Acts . London: SPCK, 1964.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1970.

Hamey, L.A. and J.A. The Roman Engineers . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Harnack, Adolf. Luke the Physician , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. New York: Putnam's, 1907.

Harris, J.R. Testimonies , I, II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916.

Hemer, C.J. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History , ed. Conrad Gempf. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Hengel, Martin. Between Jesus and Paul , trans. John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period , trans. John Bowden. 2 Vols. in One. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Hobart, W.K. The Medical Language of St. Luke . London: Longmans Green, 1882.

Horsley, Richard. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements in the Time of Jesus . New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Horton, Jr., Fred. "Reflections on the Semitisms of Luke-Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hubbard, Benjamin. "The Role of Commissioning Accounts in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hurd, John. The Origin of 1 Corinthians . London: SPCK, 1965.

Jensen, Irving. Acts: An Independent Study . Chicago: Moody, 1974.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus , trans. F.H. and C.H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989.

Jervell, Jacob. Luke and the People of God: A New Look at Luke-Acts . Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979.

Jewett, Paul. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Jewett, Robert. A Chronology of Paul's Life . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Johnson, Luke. S haring Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel . Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1981.

Kurz, William. "Luke-Acts and Historiography in the Greek Bible," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. P.J. Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

Ladd, George. A Theology of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lohse, Eduard. "Pentekoste," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 6. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Longenecker, Richard. Paul, Apostle of Liberty . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Maddox, Robert. The Purpose of Luke-Acts . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1982.

Manson, T.W. The Servant-Messiah . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953.

Marshall, I.H. Luke: Historian and Theologian . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970.

Martin, Ralph. New Testament Foundations . 2 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Miesner, Donald. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications," in Perspective on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Minear, Paul. Images of the Church in the New Testament . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977.

Moore, G.F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era . New York: Schocken, 1971.

Moule, C.F.D. "Obligation in the Ethic of Paul," in Essays in New Testament Interpretation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

. "The Christology of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Moulton, J.H., W.F. Howard, and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . 4 Vols. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1963.

Munck, Johannes. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind , trans. Frank Clarke. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1959.

Nickle, K.F. The Collection . London: SCM, 1966.

Norden, Eduard. Agnostos Theos . Stuttgart: Teubner, 1923.

O'Neill, J.C. The Theology of Acts in Its Historical Setting . London: SPCK, 1961.

Plevnik, Joseph. What Are They Saying about Paul? New York: Paulist Press, 1986.

Ramsay, William. Luke the Physician . London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1908.

. St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Richard, Earl. Acts 6:1-8:4: The Author's Method of Composition. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Rienecker, Fritz. A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament , trans. Cleon Rogers, Jr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980.

Rivkin, Ellis. A Hidden Revolution . Nashville: Abingdon, 1978.

Robertson, A.T. Luke the Historian in Light of Research . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1920.

Robinson, J.A.T. Twelve New Testament Studies . London: SCM, 1962.

Robbins, Vernon. "By Land and by Sea: The We-Passages and Ancient Sea Voyages," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Russell, Bob. Making Things Happen: The Power of Christian Leadership . Cincinnati: Standard, 1987.

Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.

Scharlemann, Martin. Stephen: A Singular Saint . Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1968.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ , ed. and rev. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979.

Shepard, J.W. The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul: An Exegetical Study . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.

Sherwin-White, A.N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament . Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul , 3rd ed. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1866.

Spiro, Abram. "Stephen's Samaritan Backgound," in Johannes Munck, The Acts of the Apostles , Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Stagg, Frank and Evelyn . Woman in the World of Jesus . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978.

Stendahl, Krister. "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West," in Paul among Jews and Gentiles . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

Swidler, Leonard. Biblical Affirmations of Woman . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979.

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

Tarn, W.W. and G.T. Griffith. Hellenistic Civilization . Cleveland: World Publishing, 1969.

Torrey, C.C. The Composition and Date of Acts . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1916.

Trites, Allison. The New Testament Concept of Witness . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

van Unnik, W.C. "Luke-Acts, A Storm Center in Contemporary Scholarship," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck and J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

. "Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth," trans. G. Ogg, in Sparsa Collecta . Part 1. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973.

Veltman, Fred. "The Defense Speeches of Paul in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Via, E.J. "An Interpretation of Acts 7:35-37 from the Perspective of Major Themes in Luke-Acts," in Society of Biblical Literature 1978 Seminar Papters , ed. Paul Achtemeier. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Vielhauer, Philipp. "On the 'Paulinism' of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Wilson, Stephen. "Law and Judaism in Acts," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. Paul Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

. The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.

Periodicals:

Acworth, Angus. "Where Was St. Paul Shipwrecked? A Re-examination of the Evidence." JTS 24 (1973): 190-193.

Bamberger, Bernard. "The Sadducees and the Belief in Angels." JBL 82 (1963): 433-435.

Best, Ernest. "Acts XIII.1-3." JTS 11 (1960): 344-348.

Blevins, William. "The Early Church: Acts 1-5." RevEx 71 (1974): 463-474.

Bowker, J.W. "Speeches in Acts." NTS 14 (1968): 96-111.

Bruce, F.F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." BJRL 68 (1986): 273-295.

Bull, Robert. "Caesarea Maritima: The Search for Herod's City." BAR 8 (1982): 24-41.

Cadbury, H.J. "Erastus of Corinth." JBL 50 (1930): 42-58.

. "Lexical Notes on Luke-Acts: V. Luke and the Horse-Doctors." JBL 52 (1933): 55-65.

Catchpole, David. "Paul, James and the Apostolic Decree." NTS 23 (1977): 428-444.

Cosgrove, Charles. "The Divine dei in Luke-Acts." NovT 26 (1984): 168-190.

Clark, David. "What Went Overboard First?" BTr 26 (1975): 144-146.

Culpepper, R.A. "Paul's Mission to the Gentile World." RevEx 71 (1974): 487-497.

Daube, David. "On Acts 23: Sadducees and Angels." JBL 109 (1990): 493-497.

Davis, J.C. "Another Look at the Relationship between Baptism and Forgiveness of Sins in Acts 2:38." RestQ 24 (1981): 80-88.

Downing, F.G. "Common Ground with Paganism in Luke and Josephus." NTS 28 (1982): 546-559.

Duncan, G.S. "Paul's Ministry in Asia - The Last Phase." NTS 3 (1957): 211-218.

Filson, Floyd. "The Christian Teacher in the First Century." JBL 60 (1941): 317-328.

Fitzgerald, Michael. "The Ship of Saint Paul: Comparative Archaeology." BA 53 (1990): 31-39.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. "The Ascension of Christ and Pentecost." TS 45 (1984): 409-440.

Gilchrist, J.M. "On What Charge Was St. Paul Brought to Rome?" ExpT 78 (1967): 264-266.

Goldsmith, Dale. "Acts 13:33-37: A Pesher on II Samuel 7." JBL 87 (1968): 321-324.

Goodspeed, E.J. "Gaius Titius Justus." JBL 69 (1950): 382-383.

Gordon, Alasdair. "The Fate of Judas according to Acts 1:18." EQ 43 (1971): 97-100.

Greenhut, Zvi. "Burial Cave of the Caiaphas Family." BAR 18 (1992): 29-36.

Haldane, Douglas. "Anchors of Antiquity." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hemer, C.J. "First Person Narrative in Acts 27-28." TB 36 (1985): 97-98.

Hirschfield, Nicolle. "The Ship of St. Paul - Part I: Historical Background." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hohlfelder, Robert. "Caesarea beneath the Sea." BAR 8 (1982): 42-47.

Horsley, G.H.R. "The Inscriptions of Ephesos and the New Testament." NovT 34 (1992): 105-168.

Kepple, Robert. "The Hope of Israel, The Resurrection of the Dead, and Jesus: A Study of Their Relationship in Acts with Particular Regard to the Understanding of Paul's Trial Defense." JETS 20 (1977): 231-241.

Kilgallen, John. "The Function of Stephen's Speech (Acts 7:2-53)." Biblica 70 (1989). 173-193.

Kilpatrick, G.D. "Acts XXIII.23 DEXIOLABOI ." NTS 14 (1963): 393-394.

Kodell, Jerome. "'The Word of God grew': The Ecclesial Tendency of logos in Acts 1,7; 12,24; 19,20." Biblica 55 (1974): 505-519.

Ladouceur, David. "Hellenistic Preconceptions of Shipwreck and Pollution as a Context for Acts 27-28." HTR 73 (1980): 435-449.

Lofthouse, W.F. "The Holy Spirit in the Acts and the Fourth Gospel." ExpT 52 (1940-41): 334-337.

Malherbe, Abraham. "Gentle as Nurse." NovT 12 (1970): 203-217.

Mare, Harold. "Acts 7: Jewish or Samaritan?" WThJ 34 (1971): 1-21.

Mastin, B.A. "Scaeva the Chief Priest." JTS 27 (1976): 405-412.

Meinardus, Otto. "St. Paul Shipwrecked in Dalmatia." BA 39 (1976): 145-147.

Merrill, Eugene. "Paul's Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." BiblThecSac 138 (1981): 246-257.

Metzger, Bruce. "The Meaning of Christ's Ascension." ChrT 10 (1966): 863-864.

Miles, Gary and Garry Trompf. "Luke and Antiphon: The Theology of Acts 27-28 in the Light of Pagan Beliefs about Divine Retribution, Pollution, and Shipwreck." HTR 69 (1976): 259-267.

Nash, Donald. "For the Remission of Sin." ChrSt (3-30-75): 270-272.

Palmer, Darryl. "Acts and the Historical Monograph." TB 43 (1992): 373-388.

Parrat, J.K. "The Rebaptism of the Ephesian Disciples." ExpT (1968): 182-183.

Parker, Pierson. "Once More, Acts and Galatians." JBL 36 (1967): 175-182.

Rapuano, Yehudah. "Did Philip Baptize the Eunuch at Ein Yael?" BAR (1990): 44-49.

Scott, J.J. "Stephen's Speech: A Possible Model for Luke's Historical Method?" JETS 17 (1974): 91-97.

. "The Cornelius Incident in the Light of Its Jewish Setting." JETS 34 (1991): 475-484.

Slater, Thomas. "The Possible Influence of LXX Exodus 20:11 on Acts 14:15." AUSS 30 (1992): 151-152.

Stagg, Frank. "The Unhindered Gospel." RevEx 71 (1974): 451-462.

Stein, Robert. "The Relationship of Galatians 2:1-10 and Acts 15:1-35: Two Neglected Arguments." JETS 17 (1974): 239-242.

Stoops, Jr., R.F. "Riot and Assembly: The Social Context of Acts 19:23-41." JBL 108 (1989): 73-91.

Talbert, Charles. "The Place of the Resurrection in the Theology of Luke." Int 46 (1992): 19-30.

Thornton, T.C.G. "Stephen's Use of Isaiah LXVI.1." JTS 25 (1974): 432-435.

Tiede, David. "The Exaltation of Jesus and the Restoration of Israel in Acts 1." HTR 79 (1986): 278-286.

Trites, Allison. "The Importance of Legal Scenes and Language in the Book of Acts." NovT 16 (1974): 278-284.

Viviano, Benedict and Justin Taylor. "Sadducees, Angels, and Resurrection (Acts 23:8-9)." JBL 111 (1992): 496-498.

Walker, William. "Acts and the Pauline Corpus Reconsidered." JSNT 24 (1985): 3-23.

Wall, Robert. "Successors to 'the Twelve' according to Acts 12:1-17." CBQ 53 (1991): 628-643.

Wilcox, Max. "The 'God-Fearers' in Acts - A Reconsideration." JSNT 13 (1981): 102-122.

Workman, W.P. "A New Date Indication in Acts." ExpT 11 (1900): 316-317.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

AUSS . . . Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA . . . Biblical Archaeology

BAR . . . Biblical Archaeology Review

BiblThecSac . . . Bibliotheca Sacra

BJRL . . . Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTr . . . Bible Translator

ChrSt . . . Christian Standard

ed. . . . edited by

EQ . . . Evangelical Quarterly

ExpT . . . Expository Times

HTR . . . Harvard Theological Review

JBL . . . Journal of Biblical Literature

JSNT . . . Journal of Studies in the New Testament

JETS . . . Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JTS . . . Journal of Theological Studies

n. . . . note

NovT . . . Novum Testamentum

RevEx . . . Review and Expositor

TB . . . Tyndale Bulletin

TDNT . . . Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TS . . . Theological Studies

trans . . . translated by

WThJ . . . Westminster Theological Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Acts (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM - 1:1-8:1a

A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BOOK - 1:1-3

B. THE COMMISSIONING OF THE APOSTLES - 1:4-8

C. THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST - 1:9-11

D. WAITING FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT - 1:12-14

E. THE REPLACEMENT OF JUDAS ISCARIOT - 1:15-26

F. THE DAY OF PENTECOST - 2:1-47

1. The Apostles Baptized with the Holy Spirit - 2:1-4

2. The Amazement of the Crowd - 2:5-13

3. The Sermon of Peter - 2:14-36

a. The Promise of Joel - 2:14-21

b. The Proclamation of Jesus' Resurrection - 2:22-28

c. Jesus the Lord and Messiah - 2:29-36

4. The Call to Repentance - 2:37-40

5. The First Church - 2:41-47

G. THE HEALING OF THE LAME MAN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES - 3:1-4:31

1. A Cripple Cured - 3:1-10

2. Peter's Address in Solomon's Colonnade - 3:11-26

a. The Power of Jesus' Name - 3:11-16

b. The Call to Repentance - 3:17-21

c. The Witness of the Prophets - 3:22-26

3. The Arrest of Peter and John - 4:1-4

4. Peter and John before the Sanhedrin - 4:5-12

5. The Debate in the Sanhedrin - 4:13-17

6. The Prohibition against Preaching Christ - 4:18-22

7. The Release of Peter and John - 4:23-31

a. Their Reunion with the Twelve - 4:23

b. Their Prayer for Boldness - 4:24-30

c. Their Power from the Holy Spirit - 4:31

H. THE UNITY AND GENEROSITY OF THE EARLY CHURCH - 4:32-5:16

1. The Sharing of Material Possessions by Believers - 4:32-35

2. The Example of Barnabas - 4:36-37

3. The Deceit of Ananias and Sapphira - 5:1-11

4. The Signs and Wonders from the Apostles - 5:12-16

I. THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES - 5:17-42

1. The Imprisonment of the Apostles - 5:17-26

2. The Apostles before the Sanhedrin - 5:27-40

3. The Continued Witness of the Apostles - 5:41-42

J. THE CHOOSING OF THE SEVEN DEACONS - 6:1-7

K. THE ARREST, TRIAL, AND STONING OF STEPHEN - 6:8-8:1a

1. False Accusations Against Him - 6:8-15

2. Stephen's Defense - 7:1-53

a. The Old Testament Patriarchs - 7:1-8

b. Israel in Egypt - 7:9-19

c. Early Days of Moses - 7:20-29

d. The Call of Moses - 7:30-34

e. The Wilderness Wanderings - 7:35-43

f. The Tabernacle and the Temple - 7:44-50

g. The Personal Application - 7:51-53

h. The Final Witness of Stephen - 7:54-56

i. The Death of Stephen - 7:57-60

j. The Consent of Saul - 8:1a

II. THE CHURCH IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA - 8:1b-12:25

A. PERSECUTION AND DISPERSION OF THE CHURCH - 8:1b-3

B. MINISTRY OF PHILIP - 8:4-40

1. Philip in Samaria - 8:4-8

2. The Conversion of Simon Magus - 8:9-13

3. The Visit of Peter and John to Samaria - 8:14-17

4. Peter's Condemnation of Simon's Offer to Pay for the Holy Spirit - 8:18-24

5. The Return of the Apostles to Jerusalem - 8:25

6. Philip and the Conversion of the Ethiopian - 8:26-40

C. THE CONVERSION OF SAUL OF TARSUS - 9:1-31

1. The Expedition of Saul to Damascus - 9:1-2

2. The Light and the Voice from Heaven - 9:3-7

3. The Entrance of Saul to Damascus - 9:8-9

4. The Commissioning of Ananias to Visit Saul - 9:10-16

5. The Visit from Ananias - 9:17-19a

6. The Preaching of Saul in Damascus - 9:19b-22

7. The Escape of Saul from Damascus - 9:23-25

8. The Ministry of Saul in Jerusalem and His Departure for Tarsus - 9:26-30

D. PEACE AND PROSPERITY FOR THE CHURCH - 9:31

E. PETER'S MINISTRY IN WESTERN JUDEA - 9:32-43

1. The Ministry at Lydda: Healing of Aeneas - 9:32-35

2. The Ministry at Joppa: The Raising of Dorcas - 9:36-43

F. THE CONVERSION OF THE FIRST GENTILES - 10:1-11:18

1. The Ministry of Peter at Caesarea - 10:1-48

a. The Vision Seen by Cornelius - 10:1-8

b. The Vision Seen by Peter - 10:9-16

c. The Arrival at Joppa of Servants Sent by Cornelius - 10:17-23a

d. The Visit of Peter to the House of Cornelius - 10:23b-33

e. The Sermon by Peter - 10:34-43

f. The Reception of the Holy Spirit by Gentiles - 10:44-48

2. The Endorsement of Peter's Ministry by the Jerusalem Leadership - 11:1-18

a. The Questioning of the Jerusalem Leaders - 11:1-3

b. The Defense by Peter - 11:4-17

c. The Defense Accepted - 11:18

G. THE CHRISTIANS AT ANTIOCH - 11:19-30

1. Evangelism among the Gentiles of Antioch - 11:19-21

2. The Ministry of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 11:22-26

3. The Famine Relief Work from Antioch - 11:27-30

H. THE PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I - 12:1-25

1. The Martyrdom of James and Imprisonment of Peter - 12:1-4

2. The Escape of Peter from Prison - 12:5-11

3. The Report of Peter about the Escape - 12:12-17

4. The Discovery of Peter's Escape - 12:18-19a

5. The Death of Herod Agrippa I - 12:19b-23

6. The Continued Progress of the Gospel - 12:24

7. The Return of Barnabas and Saul to Antioch - 12:25

III. THE CHURCH IN THE ENDS OF THE EARTH - 13:1-28:31

A. THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 13:1-14:28

1. The Commissioning of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 13:1-3

2. The Arrival of Barnabas and Saul on Cyprus - 13:4-5

3. The Confrontation at Paphos - 13:6-12

4. The Arrival at Pisidian Antioch - 13:13-15

5. Paul's Address in the Synagogue - 13:16-41

a. Old Testament Prelude to Christ - 13:16-22

b. Fulfillment in Christ - 13:23-37

c. Conclusion and Warning - 13:38-41

6. The Response to Paul's Address - 13:42-43

7. Gentile Interest and Jewish Opposition - 13:44-52

8. The Visit to Iconium - 14:1-7

9. The Healing at Lystra - 14:8-13

10. Paul's Address about the Living God - 14:14-18

11. The Stoning of Paul - 14:19-20a

12. The Visit to Derbe and Return to Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch - 14:20b-23

13. Return to Antioch of Syria - 14:24-28

B. THE COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM - 15:1-35

1. The Visit of Judaizers to Antioch - 15:1-2

2. The Journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem - 15:3-5

3. The Convening of the Council - 15:6

4. The Address of Peter - 15:7-11

5. The Address of Paul and Barnabas - 15:12

6. The Summation by James - 15:13-21

7. The Apostolic Letter to Gentile Christians - 15:22-29

8. The Reception of the Apostolic Letter by the Church in Antioch - 15:30-35

C. THE SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 15:36-18:22

1. The Proposal and the Debate about John Mark - 15:36-39

2. The Journey through Syria and Cilicia - 15:40-41

3. The Visit to Derbe and Lystra - 16:1-4

4. The Growth of the Churches - 16:5

5. The Journey through Phrygia and Galatia - 16:6-7

6. The Macedonian Vision in Troas - 16:8-10

7. The Visits to Samothrace and Neapolis - 16:11

8. The Visit to Philippi - 16:12-40

a. The Faith of Lydia - 16:12-15

b. The Slave Girl with the Spirit of Divination - 16:16-22

c. The Imprisonment - 16:23-26

d. The Conversion of the Jailer - 16:27-34

e. The Departure - 16:35-40

9. The Visits at Amphipolis and Apollonia - 17:1a

10. The Visit at Thessalonica - 17:1b-9

a. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue - 17:1b-4

b. The Backlash from the Jews - 17:5-9

11. The Visit of Paul and Silas in Berea - 17:10-14

12. The Visit at Athens - 17:15-34

a. Paul's Preaching in Athens - 17:15-17

b. Paul's Encounter with the Philosophers - 17:18

c. Paul's Address in the Areopagus - 17:19-31

1) Paul's Acknowledgement of Their Idols - 17:19-23

2) God the Creator of Everything - 17:24-26

3) God Who is Near Enough to Touch - 17:27-29

4) God Who Judges and Demands Repentance - 17:30-31

d. The Reaction to Paul's Preaching - 17:32-34

13. The Visit at Corinth - 18:1-17

a. Paul's Arrival and Ministry with Aquila and Priscilla - 18:1-4

b. Resistance from the Jews and Paul's Decision to Preach to the Gentiles - 18:5-6

c. Encouragement in a Night Vision - 18:7-10

d. Paul's Trial before Gallio - 18:11-17

14. The Visit at Cenchrea - 18:18

15. The Visit at Ephesus - 18:19-21

16. The Journey to Caesarea, Jerusalem,and Antioch of Syria - 18:22

D. THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 18:23-21:16

1. The Journey through Galatia and Phrygia - 18:23

2. The Ministry of Apollos in Ephesus and Corinth - 18:24-28

3. The Twelve Disciples at Ephesus - 19:1-7

4. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue and the School of Tyrannus - 19:8-10

5. The Conflict with the Exorcists - 19:11-19

6. The Growth of Paul's Ministry - 19:20

7. Paul's Plans to Visit Rome - 19:21-22

8. The Riot of Demetrius and the Silversmiths - 19:23-41

a. The Anger of the Silversmiths - 19:23-28

b. The Demonstration in the Theater - 19:29-34

c. The Calming Words of the Town Clerk - 19:35-41

9. The Journey through Macedonia and Greece - 20:1-6

10. The Visit at Troas - 20:7-12

11. The Visits at Assos, Mitylene, Kios (Chios), Samos, and Miletus - 20:13-15

12. The Meeting with the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-38

a. Paul's Summons of the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-17

b. Paul's Reflections on His Ephesian Ministry - 20:18-21

c. Paul's Expectations for the Future - 20:22-24

d. Paul's Charge to the Ephesian Elders - 20:25-31

e. Paul's Final Admonition - 20:32-35

f. The Emotional Parting - 20:36-38

13. The Stops at Cos, Rhodes, and Patara - 21:1-2

14. The Arrival at Tyre - 21:3-6

15. The Arrival at Ptolemais and Caesarea - 21:7-14

a. The Entrance into the Home of Philip - 21:7-9

b. The Warning of Agabus and Paul's Response - 21:10-14

16. The Arrival at Jerusalem - 21:15-16

E. PAUL'S VISIT TO THE TEMPLE AND HIS ARREST - 21:17-23:30

1. Paul's Reception by the Church - 21:17-26

a. Paul's Report of the Gentile Response to the Gospel - 21:17-19

b. The Proposal of James and the Elders - 21:20-26

2. The Riot in the Temple - 21:27-30

3. Paul's Rescue by the Romans - 21:31-36

4. Paul's Request for Permission to Address the Mob - 21:37-40

5. Paul's Defense to the Jews - 22:1-21

a. Paul's Early Days - 22:1-5

b. The Episode on the Damascus Road - 22:6-11

c. The Visit from Ananias of Damascus - 22:12-16

d. The Vision in the Temple - 22:17-21

6. The Reaction of the Mob and Paul's Imprisonment - 22:22-29

7. The Trial before the Sanhedrin - 22:30-23:10

a. The Confrontation with the High Priest - 22:30-23:5

b. The Division of the Pharisees and Sadducees over the Resurrection Hope - 23:6-10

8. The Word of Encouragement from God - 23:11

9. The Conspiracy Against Paul's Life - 23:12-15

10. The Discovery of the Conspiracy - 23:16-22

11. The Decision to Transfer Paul to Caesarea - 23:23-24

12. The Letter from the Tribune to Felix - 23:25-30

F. THE IMPRISONMENT AT CAESAREA - 23:31-26:32

1. Paul's Transfer to Caesarea - 23:31-35

2. Paul's Trial before Felix - 24:1-21

a. The Accusations Against Paul - 24:1-9

b. The Defense by Paul - 24:10-21

3. The Postponement of a Verdict by Felix - 24:22-23

4. Paul's Interviews with Felix - 24:24-26

5. The Ascension of Festus: Paul's Continued Custody - 24:27

6. The Visit of Festus to Jerusalem - 25:1-5

7. Paul's Appeal to Caesar - 25:6-12

8. The Visit of Agrippa II and Bernice to Festus - 25:13-22

9. Paul's Appearance before Agrippa - 25:23-26:32

a. The Presentation of Paul to Agrippa by Festus - 25:23-27

b. Paul's Address to Agrippa - 26:1-23

1) The Introduction - 26:1-3

2) Paul's Pharisaic Heritage - 26:4-8

3) Paul's Former Zeal Against Christians - 26:9-11

4) Paul's Experience on the Road to Damascus - 26:12-18

5) Paul's Obedience to God - 26:19-20

6) Paul's Arrest - 26:21

7) Paul's Continuing Preaching of Christ - 26:22-23

c. The Interchange Between Festus, Paul, and Agrippa - 26:24-29

d. The Agreement Regarding Paul's Innocence - 26:30-32

G. PAUL'S VOYAGE TO ROME - 27:1-28:31

1. The Journey from Caesarea to Sidon - 27:1-3

2. The Journey from Sidon to Myra - 27:4-6

3. The Journey from Myra around Crete - 27:7

4. The Arrival at Fair Havens - 27:8-15

a. Paul's Warning About the Coming Danger - 27:8-12

b. The Storm at Sea - 27:13-15

5. The Difficult Journey around Cauda - 27:16-17

6. The Shipwreck - 27:18-44

a. The Attempts to Lighten the Ship - 27:18-19

b. Paul's Words of Encouragement - 27:20-26

c. The Sighting of Land - 27:27-29

d. The Attempt of the Sailors to Escape - 27:30-32

e. Paul's Encouragement of the Crew to Eat - 27:33-38

f. The Running Aground of the Ship - 27:39-41

g. The Escape to Dry Land - 27:42-44

7. The Winter at Malta - 28:1-10

a. The Welcome by the Barbarians - 28:1-6

b. Paul's Ministry of Healing - 28:7-10

8. The Journey to Syracuse - 28:11-12

9. The Journey to Rhegium and Puteoli - 28:13-14

10. The Welcome at Three Taverns - 28:15

11. The Imprisonment at Rome - 28:16-29

a. The Arrival at Rome - 28:16

b. Paul's Preaching to the Jews - 28:17-29

1) Paul's Defense - 28:17-20

2) The Request for Further Information by the Jews - 28:21-22

3) The Interview with the Jews - 28:23

4) The Mixed Response - 28:24-29

12. Paul's Two Years in Rome - 28:30-31

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV