Matthew 21:31-32

21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ¹  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ²  tax collectors ³  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God! 21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and prostitutes did believe. Although ⁴  you saw this, you did not later change your minds ⁵  and believe him.

Luke 24:47

24:47 and repentance ⁶  for the forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed ⁷  in his name to all nations, ⁸  beginning from Jerusalem. ⁹ 

Acts 2:36-38

2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt ¹⁰  that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified ¹¹  both Lord ¹²  and Christ.” ¹³ 

The Response to Peter’s Address

2:37 Now when they heard this, ¹⁴  they were acutely distressed ¹⁵  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 ¹⁶  in the name of Jesus Christ ¹⁷  for ¹⁸  the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ¹⁹ 

Acts 20:21

20:21 testifying ²⁰  to both Jews and Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus. ²¹ 

Acts 20:2

20:2 After he had gone through those regions ²²  and spoken many words of encouragement ²³  to the believers there, ²⁴  he came to Greece, ²⁵ 

Acts 2:25-26

2:25 For David says about him,

‘I saw the Lord always in front of me, ²⁶ 

for he is at my right hand so that I will not be shaken.

2:26 Therefore my heart was glad and my tongue rejoiced;

my body ²⁷  also will live in hope,

[21:31]  ¹ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ² tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ³ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[21:32]  ⁴ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:32]  ⁵ sn The word translated change your minds is the same verb used in v. 29 (there translated had a change of heart). Jesus is making an obvious comparison here, in which the religious leaders are viewed as the disobedient son.

[24:47]  ⁶ sn This repentance has its roots in declarations of the Old Testament. It is the Hebrew concept of a turning of direction.

[24:47]  ⁷ tn Or “preached,” “announced.”

[24:47]  ⁸ sn To all nations. The same Greek term (τὰ ἔθνη, ta eqnh) may be translated “the Gentiles” or “the nations.” The hope of God in Christ was for all the nations from the beginning.

[24:47]  ⁹ sn Beginning from Jerusalem. See Acts 2, which is where it all starts.

[2:36]  ¹⁰ tn Or “know for certain.” This term is in an emphatic position in the clause.

[2:36]  ¹¹ 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.

[2:36]  ¹² 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.

[2:36]  ¹³ tn Or “and Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[2:37]  ¹⁴ 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.

[2:37]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “they were pierced to the heart” (an idiom for acute emotional distress).

[2:38]  ¹⁶ 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.

[2:38]  ¹⁷ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[2:38]  ¹⁸ 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.

[2:38]  ¹⁹ tn Here the genitive τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος (tou Jagiou pneumato") is a genitive of apposition; the gift consists of the Holy Spirit.

[20:21]  ²⁰ tn BDAG 233 s.v. διαμαρτύρομαι 1 has “testify of, bear witness to (orig. under oath)…of repentance to Judeans and Hellenes Ac 20:21.”

[20:21]  ²¹ tc Several mss, including some of the more important ones (Ì⁷⁴ א Α C [D] E 33 36 323 945 1175 1241 1505 1739 pm and a number of versions), read Χριστόν (Criston, “Christ”) at the end of this verse. This word is lacking in B H L P Ψ 614 pm. Although the inclusion is supported by many earlier and better mss, internal evidence is on the side of the omission: In Acts, both “Lord Jesus” and “Lord Jesus Christ” occur, though between 16:31 and the end of the book “Lord Jesus Christ” appears only in 28:31, perhaps as a kind of climactic assertion. Thus, the shorter reading is to be preferred.

[20:2]  ²² tn BDAG 633 s.v. μέρος 1.b.γ gives the meanings “the parts (of a geographical area), region, district,” but the use of “district” in this context probably implies too much specificity.

[20:2]  ²³ tn Grk “and encouraging them with many words.” The participle παρακαλέσας (parakalesa", “encouraging”) has been translated by the phrase “spoken…words of encouragement” because the formal equivalent is awkward in contemporary English.

[20:2]  ²⁴ tn Grk “[to] them”; the referent (the believers there) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[20:2]  ²⁵ tn In popular usage the term translated “Greece” here could also refer to the Roman province officially known as Achaia (BDAG 318 s.v. ῾Ελλάς).

[2:25]  ²⁶ tn Or “always before me.”

[2:26]  ²⁷ tn Grk “my flesh.”