|
You will receive power when
the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you
shall be My witnesses
both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea
and Samaria, and even to the remotest
part of the earth.
~ Acts 1:7-8 ~
|
Every so often, a commentary comes to the attention of the
student of Scripture that strikes him or her as being head and shoulders
above the crowd. Steven Charles Ger's Acts: Witnesses to the World
has struck this editor and AMC's board secretary Mottel Baleston in just
such a way. In fact, as I carefully read through the text for editing
purposes - which includes no change in the text - I find myself engaged
and absorbed not merely as an editor, but as a student. For these
reasons Mottel and I have decided to present Acts in its
entirety - not just for the wealth of information that may be gained
from its study, but, as Mottel stated, as a model for how a Bible study
ought to be done; so be on the lookout for an Acts segment in
each Shofar for many editions to come. Links to previous increments of Acts:
Witnesses to the World
may be found in our
Library.
To gain the most from this study, it is suggested that the Scripture
portions whose references are provided in the headings be read prior to
considering Steve's comments on them. ~ editor
SECTION ONE:
THE JERUSALEM WITNESS
(ACTS 1:1-8)
CHAPTER ONE: BEGINNING IN JERUSALEM (Acts 1:1-26)
Preview
Together, the gospel of Luke and the
book of Acts comprise about
twenty-five percent
of the New Testament. Luke’s writing has made a significant contribution
to the
church’s collection of Holy Scripture. In this initial chapter of his
second volume,
Luke prepares his readers for the major events still to come. This
chapter records a
summary of the last conversation between Jesus and His apostles prior to
His
ascension and the selection of a replacement to fill the apostolic
position vacated by
Judas.
Prologue (1:1-3)
Luke begins Acts with a prologue that connects this book
with his gospel, his first, or
former, account. Luke meant for the
book of Acts to be the sequel to
his gospel, the
next installment in a two-scroll series. In fact, Acts might be thought
of as Luke, Book II.
Long before Hollywood had conceived its first blockbuster sequel there
was Luke,
continuing his own gospel blockbuster, which just happened to be the
greatest story ever
told.
In his opening words, Luke briefly summarizes the contents of his
previous work, his gospel, an account of all that Jesus began to do and teach. In using
the term, “began,”
Luke affirmed that what he had reported in his gospel was only the
beginning, the “first
stage” of Jesus’ work. In the book of Acts, the story of Jesus continues
as He works, now
in His resurrected state, through His apostles and His church, His body.
Luke’s purpose
in Acts is the same as was for his gospel: to convey accurate,
systematic, chronological
and historical information about his subject.
In the first two verses, Luke introduces the main players in the
narrative. The three protagonists are Jesus, the Holy Spirit and the apostles. Luke
emphasizes in Acts 1:2
Jesus’ specific choice of these individual men (as recorded in Luke
6:13-16) and His
personal invitation for them to carry out their commission as His
witnesses. Ultimately,
what Luke relates throughout twenty-eight chapters is the continuing
work of the risen
and exalted Messiah, Jesus, carried out by his apostles, with the
guidance and through the
power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus and His apostles are organically
interconnected to one
another, bonded by the agency of the Spirit.
This is one reason that a full name becomes difficult to assign to the
book. Some
favor The Acts of the Apostles . This is the traditional title, which
originated in the second
century 160-180 AD. However, this is ultimately an unsatisfactory title
because the book
really only records the acts of Peter and Paul, with a smattering
sampling of the acts of
non-apostles like Stephen and Philip. For this reason, some propose the
alternative title of
The Acts of Peter and Paul , yet; again, this also does not take into
account the
contributions of apostolic associates Stephen and Philip.
The quest for a more accurate descriptive title for Acts has been a long
and creative
one. Another obvious alternative title is The Acts of the Holy Spirit,
by reason of the
Spirit’s being mentioned some fifty times throughout the narrative.
Still others would
capitalize on its sequel aspect as a continuation of the gospel of Luke
and therefore favor
variations on The Acts of the Resurrected Christ.
Since each title is partially accurate, most compromise and settle for
the simpler The
Book of Acts, or The Book of the Acts. The Greek word praxeis means
“acts” or “deeds,”
from which we derive the word, “praxis.” This term was used in ancient
secular Greek
literature to summarize the accomplishments of great men. Thus, this
title seems to be most appropriate for Luke’s efforts.
Theophilus. As in the preface to his gospel, Luke once again addresses
his work to
the enigmatic Theophilus. Outside of Luke’s parallel prefaces, no
mention of this
individual is made, either within the New Testament record or outside of
it. However, the
preface to Luke’s gospel provides some insight, if not into the identity
of Theophilus, at
least into his background (Luke 1:4).
The name Theophilus itself means either “lover of God” or “beloved of
God.” Luke
uses the standard first century historical format in addressing his
intended audience.
Theophilus was perhaps Luke’s benefactor, and was most likely a Roman
official of
notable rank. Luke addressed his patron with the term kratistos,
most
excellent, which
was a formal Roman designation of honor. Luke also applies this
designation in Acts to
Felix (Acts 23:26; 24:3) and Festus (Acts 26:25). Additionally, an
example of parallel
usage is provided by Josephus, who also prefaced his writing with the
same term of honor
when addressing his patron, Epaphroditis. (7)
It may be presumed that Theophilus was a believer who, although he had
received
some Christian instruction, was in need of a broader education in the
foundational history
of his faith (Luke 1:1-4). Furthermore, it is probable that prior to
becoming a Christian,
Theophilus had been a God-fearer, a Gentile who worshipped the God of
Israel. This
might explain Luke’s preoccupation in Acts with God-fearers (Acts 10:2,
22, 35; 13:16,
26, 43, 50; 17:4, 17; 18:7).
Luke was not writing a comprehensive volume of church history for
Theophilus. That
would have been a much bulkier volume for Theophilus to cart around!
Rather, Luke
carefully chose only to include selected vignettes culled from the broad
panorama of
church history’s first three decades. This is probably indicative of the
specific questions
Theophilus may have had and the concerns Luke wished to address on his
behalf.
On the basis of what Luke has included in his Acts narrative, one may
speculate that
Theophilus’ questions may have included concerns about the nature of the
relationship of
the church to Judaism, Israel and the Temple; the relation between Jews
and Jewish and
Gentile Christians; the suitability and basis of Gentile inclusion
within the church; the
nature of Paul’s apostolic commission; whether or not Christianity posed
a threat to the
Roman Empire; and the purpose of the Holy Spirit’s ministry to
believers.
Although solely addressed to Theophilus, Acts was clearly not meant to
be
sequestered away in Theophilus’ private library. Luke clearly intended
for this work to
instruct other believers and to be widely circulated among them as well
as the general
public.
In Acts 1:3, Luke provides a brief summary of Jesus’ post-resurrection
ministry to his
apostles. The foundational task Jesus had to accomplish was to convince
His apostles that
He was alive. To this end, Luke records that Jesus had to furnish to
them “many
convincing proofs,” from the Greek tekmeriois, to forever remove all
doubt that He was
resurrected in a physical, tangible, yet glorified body. The New
Testament books are
painstakingly careful to continually emphasize that Jesus was physically
resurrected.
There is to be no misunderstanding concerning His resurrection
appearances. This was no
ghost or spirit, no mass vision or hallucination. Jesus rose from the
dead corporeal,
touchable (John 20:27), and capable of eating and drinking (Luke
24:42-43; Acts 1:3).
Acts 1:3 is the only place where the forty-day length of his post
resurrection ministry
is recorded. Jesus did not appear continuously for forty consecutive
days, but rather at
intervals. The exact number of appearances Jesus made to His disciples
is not recorded,
but from the gospel records we know there were at least ten separate
appearances over
the forty-day period, if not more.
Luke relates that the main subject of Jesus’ teaching over the course of
forty days during those appearances was the kingdom of God (1:3). This was the
major topic of
discussion between Jesus and the apostles and provides a major theme of
the apostolic
message in Acts. However, before launching into a discussion of what is
meant by the
kingdom of God and related teachings of Jesus, a brief overview of the
name Luke used
to refer to each of Jesus’ specially selected students, the main
protagonists of Acts, the
term, “apostle,” is in order.
Apostle. The term “apostle,” which appears some thirty times in Acts, is
a
transliteration of the Greek, apostolos. A key term in Acts,
apostle is
primarily used
throughout the New Testament in a specialized sense to mean,
“commissioned one,” with
the commissioning having been done by Christ. Thus, an apostle is a
commissioned
representative of Christ who is empowered by His delegated authority.
The New Testament teaches two extremely restricted views of the
apostolic office.
There were two classifications of apostle. The first category was the
more restrictive.
This is the primary category of apostle, and membership was limited to
the Twelve. In
Acts, the term almost always refers to the Twelve (1:26; 2:37, 42, 43;
4:33, 35, 36, 37;
5:2, 12, 18, 29, 40; 6:6; 8:1, 14, 18; 9:27; 11:1). The Twelve were
personally selected by
Jesus to be His representatives, authoritative witnesses of His
ministry, and provide the
founding leadership for His church. In the impending kingdom, their
leadership
responsibilities will include ruling over the twelve tribes of Israel
(Matt.19:28).
This foundational commission to rule Israel is why in v.15-26, at the
dawn of their
mission, selecting a replacement for Judas’ abandoned slot was
essential. In other words,
it was not because the apostolic slot was empty, per se, that there was
a need to replace
Judas. Otherwise, a continuous stream of votes would eventually need to
be taken upon
the death of each apostle. Rather, it was necessary for the empty
apostolic slot to be filled
because the unimaginable had occurred: one of the twelve apostles had
abandoned his
present and future position of responsibility. As the kingdom of God was
imminent, the
apostles wanted to ensure that they all stood ready to fulfill their
commissioned roles.
This point is demonstrated some eleven years subsequent to the events of
v.15-26.
Following the execution of the apostle James in 44 AD (12:1-2), the
eleven surviving
apostles exert no effort to replace him. James is no Judas, and his
apostolic slot remains
unfilled after his death. When the kingdom of God arrives, James, unlike
Judas, will not
betray his future commission to rule over one of the tribes of Israel.
This balanced emphasis on apostolic responsibilities, both present and
future, also
clarifies why the focus is shifted away from the twelve apostles in the
final division of the
Acts narrative (13-28). Having fulfilled the outline of their initial
apostolic commission
of witnessing to the Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles, Luke moves the
Twelve into the background. After 12:17, none of the Twelve is mentioned in the
narrative again, with the
exception of a “cameo” appearance by Peter during the Jerusalem Council
(15:6-29).
The concept of a perpetual apostolic succession cannot be derived from
the Acts
narrative. By definition, only those who had seen Jesus could ever be
apostles. It was not
an office that could ever be passed down to the next generation. The
apostolic office of
the Twelve terminated with their deaths.
The final division of Acts (13-28) focuses on those who are members of
the
remaining apostolic category. This second classification of apostle was
more inclusive,
but possessed requirements that were no less stringent. Luke does not
supply a complete
list of this group of apostles, but it includes James (the brother of
Jesus), Barnabas and
Paul.
From Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, we learn that the essential
requirement for
this level of apostleship is to have actually seen the resurrected Lord
Jesus (1 Cor. 9:1).
Paul gives us a comprehensive list of those who have witnessed the
resurrected Christ (1 Cor. 15:5-8). We can infer from Paul that while the capacity of this
category of apostle is
seemingly not restricted to twelve, it is limited to a set number of
individuals to whom
Christ personally appeared. Moreover, Paul is clear that in addition to
the unprecedented
fashion by which he has witnessed the resurrected Christ (Acts 9:3-8),
he is the very last
(and least) one of this group to do so (1 Cor. 15:8-9). Paul is adamant
that, by definition,
there can never be any other apostles after him. (8)
There is one final delimiter Paul gives concerning this category of
apostle. This is the ability to perform the signs of a true apostle, i.e., signs, wonders
and miracles (2 Cor.
12:12). Like identifying “calling cards,” these signs were the divine
validation, the
credentials of those with genuine apostolic authority.
In addition to serving as commissioned witnesses of the Lord Jesus’
resurrection, the
apostles also provided the leadership of the community of faith,
overseeing its growth
and radical expansion outward from Jerusalem. Finally, Paul refers to
apostleship as
being one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11).
The
Promise of the Father (1:4-5)
Luke’s gospel ended with the ascension (Luke 24:50-51), and this is the
event with which
Luke also begins his sequel. What Luke provides in the first 11 verses
of Acts is a rough
summary of his gospel ascension account (Luke 24:44-53).The narrative
story of Acts
picks up in Acts 1:4, with Jesus gathered together with His apostles
immediately prior to
His return to heaven. If Jesus’ passion and resurrection occurred in the
year 33 AD, as is
likely, then some precision may be exercised on the date of this event.
The ascension of
Jesus most probably occurred on Thursday, May 14, 33 AD, ten days prior
to the Jewish
festival of Pentecost.
As the parallel account in Luke 24:50 reveals, they are assembled near
the village of
Bethany, somewhere midway up the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives.
This area of
the Mount of Olives is not visible from Jerusalem but in fact, is
roughly a mile away from
the “traditional” site of the ascension, which is incorrectly situated
at the hill’s highest
point of elevation. The Mount of Olives is not really a mountain but
rather a two-mile
long ridge one half mile east of the Jerusalem, which rises
approximately one hundred
feet above the city.
The Greek term synalizo, which most translations render as “gathering
them
together,” appears in the New Testament only here in Acts 1:4. A better
translation may
well be, “eating together with.” As mentioned previously, one of the
“convincing proofs”
of Jesus’ bodily resurrection was His ability to eat. However, whether
the apostles are
gathered together on the Mount of Olives with Jesus for instruction
alone or instruction
accompanied by a meal does not affect the point the passage, which is
the content of
Jesus’ final commission to His apostles.
Foundational to the commission is Jesus’ command for the apostles to
“sit tight” in Jerusalem and wait an indeterminate amount of time for
what Jesus called, the promise
of My Father. This same phrase of Jesus’ is quoted by Luke in the
parallel account of
the commission at the end of his gospel (Luke 24:49). In addition to
what Jesus may have
taught his apostles during His post-resurrection ministry, this promise
had been discussed
by Him some forty-three days earlier at the Passover Seder he shared
with them on the
evening of His betrayal, His “Last Supper.” At that meal, he had
revealed to His apostles
that the Holy Spirit, the parakletos, the “Comforter,” would be coming
to empower them
(John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7, 13).
Continuing His commission, Jesus then reveals to His apostles that they
are about to
enter into a major period of transition. A new age was about to dawn
which would be
defined by a new ministry of the Holy Spirit, that of Spirit baptism.
This new age would
be characterized by great acts of the Spirit. The expectation of the
Holy Spirit, Ruach
Hakodesh in Hebrew, was a key concept in first century Judaism, and the
apostles would
have been eager for this particular promise of the Father to be kept.
Jesus refers back to the ministry of his cousin, John the Baptist (Luke
3:16) to
contrast water baptism with the impending baptism with, or by means of,
the Holy Spirit.
In total, Luke refers to John’s ministry of water baptism eight times in
Acts (1:5, 22;
10:37; 11:16; 13:24-25; 19:3-4), usually in contrast to Spirit baptism.
The example in
Acts 1:5 is typical. John’s water baptism, done for the purpose of
ritual purification to
signify repentance, is contrasted with baptism with the Spirit for the
enablement of
ministry and the establishment of a holy lifestyle.
This promise of Holy Spirit baptism will be fulfilled at Pentecost in
Acts 2:1-4.
Before we continue, a brief discussion of baptism is in order.
Baptism. Baptism is simply a transliteration of the Greek word for
immersion,
baptisma. The parallel Hebrew term for immersion is mikvah. These
terms may be used
interchangeably. The first century world of the Bible knew of three
different types of
Jewish ritual immersion, mikvah, or baptism: baptism as practiced
within Judaism, the
baptism of John and Christian baptism.
Ritual immersion was an essential practice of first century Judaism.
Observance of
ritual immersion was standard practice for ritual cleansing from any
state of impurity and
served as a preparatory ritual for observance of holy days and entrance
to the Temple.
Additionally, baptism or mikvah, along with circumcision (for men) and
the offering of a
sacrifice, was one of three ritual components that were integral for
Gentile conversion to
Judaism and their initiation into the people of Israel. This conversion
ritual also included
an element of purification as a Gentile entered the water in a state of
uncleanness and
rose up cleansed and reborn, no longer identifying with his former pagan
status but as a
Jewish proselyte.
John’s ministry was so characterized by ritual immersion that he was
popularly
nicknamed “the Baptist.” John’s baptism was neither for the purpose of
ritual cleansing
nor for the purpose of Gentile conversion. Both the New Testament (Matt.
3:1-11; Mark
1:4-5; Luke 3:7-14) and Josephus (9) record that John’s innovative
emphasis to this ancient
Jewish ritual was its focus on the personal repentance and future
commitment to
righteousness of the Jewish people desiring to be immersed. Those whom
John baptized
were then identified as his disciples. The reason for John’s innovative
baptismal
emphasis was his overwhelming concern to prepare Israel for the coming
Messiah and
the kingdom He would establish (Matt. 3:11-12; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:15-18;
John 1:15-31). Jesus’ early ministry was also characterized by this same baptism
of repentance
(John 3:22).
Following Israel’s visitation by the Messiah and His exaltation, the
early church quite
naturally incorporated the common ritual of immersion, adapting it for
the purpose of
initiation into the community of faith and identification with the
resurrected Founder of
that community. Christian baptism incorporated John’s innovative
emphasis on
repentance and commitment and combined it with the purifying conversion
ritual of
Judaism. (10)
Commission (1:6-8)
This next section contains a profound question asked of Jesus by the
apostles. This
question and how it is answered (or is not answered) uncovers an
essential interpretive
issue that colors the entire book of Acts. What is this weighty
question? The apostles
inquired as to whether it was at this time that Jesus would be restoring
the kingdom to
Israel.
Kingdom . This question about the kingdom was the most logical one they
could have
asked. After all, Jesus had primarily been teaching them about the
coming kingdom of
God over the past forty days (1:3). Furthermore, throughout their three
years together,
Jesus’ preaching was continually characterized by such kingdom-oriented
instruction. Even the model prayer, which Jesus had taught to his
disciples, contained a phrase entreating God to establish His kingdom,
Your kingdom come (Matt.6:10;
Luke 11:2).
In fact, during their last Passover meal together, on the evening of His
betrayal, Jesus
had made two specific promises concerning the coming kingdom. First,
Jesus promised
that He would not eat another Passover meal until the festival was
fulfilled in the
kingdom (Luke 22:16-18). Second, Jesus promised his apostles that in the
kingdom, they
would sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Luke
22:30). In fact,
what had immediately precipitated this promise was the disciples’
argument over which
of them was to be the most respected leader in the future kingdom (Luke
22:24)!
The eventual restoration of a concrete national, political kingdom was
obviously
taken for granted by the disciples, and Jesus did nothing to correct
this assumption. Is it
possible that Jesus would have purposely misled his disciples, or that
He did not mean
what He had plainly promised? These apostles had a vested interest in
discerning exactly
when that glorious kingdom would be inaugurated.
In the next verse, Jesus’ answer indicates that He accepted the question
as a logical one but would not provide specifics. Jesus does not brush
off the question; He treats it with a serious, yet mysterious, answer.
By telling them that it was not for them to know
the times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority, He
indicated His
agreement with His students that the issue was “when,” and not “if” the
kingdom is
restored to Israel. It was simply a matter of divine timing, which just
happened to be none
of the apostles’ business.
The word translated times, is chronous,
and expresses a quantitative aspect of time, the length of a period. The
word translated epochs, kairous, indicates
a specific time
span, definite period or season. It was not for the apostles to know how
far in time the
kingdom still was or on what eventual date it would arrive. The kingdom
would assuredly
come, but at an unknown future time. That knowledge was reserved only
for the Father
(Matt: 24:36).
Over the forty days Jesus had been teaching them, the apostles had
finally become apt
and capable pupils. Having sat at the resurrected Messiah’s feet for
those forty days,
having been granted a measure of the Holy Spirit (John 20:22), and
having spent over
three years in His company exposed to Jesus’ teaching, life and example,
the apostles
could not have received a better education.
There are some, however, who hold that the apostles were off base to
have asked
Jesus about the establishment of Israel’s national theocracy. These
people do not accept
the validity of such a conception of the kingdom. For them, the kingdom
that Jesus brings
is for the church and not for Israel; a spiritual kingdom and not a
literal, national one. In
fact, this spiritual kingdom is already here, among the church, as Jesus
reigns within our
hearts and lives. What the church is currently experiencing is the
entire kingdom we can
hope to expect until the day when Jesus returns and takes us back with
Him to heaven.
So many of these preachers and theologians treat these apostles as “holy
fools,”
whose intellectual competence to comprehend Jesus’ teaching was
abnormally impeded.
The idea seems to be that if only the apostles could have had the keen
perception and
clear insight of these Bible “scholars,” then they would never have
wasted Jesus’ time
with their provincial concerns about a future kingdom that was never
meant to be taken
literally.
However, the apostles would have wondered what other sort of kingdom
could be in
view if not the physical kingdom promised to Israel throughout the Old
Testament
prophets. The apostles would have had no conception of the church being
a “spiritual”
kingdom or any sort of kingdom at all. One can imagine Peter asking
something to the
effect of, “What in or out of this world is a 'spiritual' kingdom?” The
same lack of
recognition would hold concerning the concept of a “spiritual Israel.”
Both “spiritual
kingdom” and “spiritual Israel” are ingenious notions born in European
ivory spires, a
great distance removed in both chronologic time and geographic space
from first century
Jerusalem, the apostolic witness, or any Jewish Christian with a basic
education in the
promises God made through the Hebrew prophets.
There is no question that both Testaments of the Scripture both present
and confirm
the reality of the future restoration of Israel as a nation. The coming
messianic age will be
characterized by the physical, actual rule and reign of the Messiah,
Jesus. His throne will
be that of His ancestor, King David, and as the kings of Israel did in
ancient days, Jesus
will rule from Jerusalem.
The physical land of Israel is integral to the fulfillment of this
promise. The land of
promise is inexorably bound together with the people of promise. Israel
will be the chief
of nations and God’s ancient promises to His chosen people will finally
be fully realized.
The Hebrew prophets foretold this future kingdom, Jesus’ ministry was
characterized by
His promise of this future kingdom, and the apostles certainly
anticipated this future
kingdom.
Jewish rejection? There are some who believe that the Jewish people have
forfeited
God’s promises of a glorious future kingdom as a result of their
rejection of Jesus. They
believe those earthy, physical promises of land possession, numerous
descendents and
multiple blessing made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their progeny have
now somehow
morphed into ethereal, spiritual promises which have transferred to the
church. These
people believe that God is through with the Jews; that He has broken off
His relationship
with them. His concern has now been transferred to the church. What this
concept
practically means, for most of the people espousing it, is that God has
abandoned the
Jews and is now working exclusively with the Gentiles.
Yet the book of Acts is a strong testament to the fact that in spite of
the national,
corporate rejection of their Messiah, God cannot and will not ever
abandon his people
Israel. Throughout twenty-eight chapters, the longest book in the New
Testament, God’s
faithfulness to Israel and His unrelenting and continuous call for their
repentance is
practically deafening.
Even in the final chapter of Acts, a chapter which many claim is proof
positive that God has “washed his hands” of the Jews, Paul calls Jesus
the Hope of
Israel (28:20).
God has not rejected His people. As Paul exclaims,
may it never be (Rom.
11:1)! God has
preserved for Himself a faithful remnant (Rom.11:5).
Indeed, the entirety of the Jewish people did not reject the Messiah. If
they had, there
would be no book of Acts at all! Every one of the protagonists in this
book is a Jew who
accepted Jesus as Messiah. The first actual Gentile believer does not
even enter into the
historical account for seven years, a full ten chapters into the
narrative. From Acts
chapter one through twenty-eight, thousands of Jews responded to the
gospel. Moreover,
we Jews are still responding to Jesus to this very day. The ancient
promises of God’s
kingdom program, His glorious restoration of Israel, have merely been
postponed, not
abandoned.
Those theologians who posit such a theology of “replacement,” must
choose a
different book than Acts to bolster their position. They will find no
support here. Indeed,
they will find that support is lacking not only in Acts, but also
throughout the New
Testament.
Spirit and kingdom. Another reason the apostles would have asked their
question is
that the Davidic Kingdom, the kingdom of God, is linked five times in
the Hebrew
Scriptures with the return of the Holy Spirit, the Shekinah glory of the
Lord, to Israel (Is.
32:15-20, 44:3-5, Ezek 39:28-29, Joel 2:28-3:1, Zech 12:10-13:1). In
fact, Acts 1:6
begins with the Greek, men oun, translated
so. This so connects the
apostle’s
question with Jesus’ statement about Spirit baptism in the previous
verse. The outpouring
of the Spirit was an integral component of what the prophets had written
concerning the
institution of the messianic kingdom. In other words, the outpouring of
the Holy Spirit is
clearly in the context of Israel’s national restoration. Since the
apostles were conscious of
the connection between the messianic kingdom and the baptism of the
Spirit, they were
asking whether, as a result of this coming Spirit baptism, all Israel
would finally be
saved.
The apostles were soon to learn that the corporate salvation of Israel
would not be
accomplished in short measure but was dependent on a still future
outpouring on Israel
just prior to the return of Christ and the establishment of the kingdom
(Acts 3:19-21;
Rom. 11:25-27).
However, what Jesus indicated in telling his apostles to wait for the
baptism of the
Holy Spirit was that the Spirit’s outpouring was not dependent on the
establishment of
the kingdom. Indeed, the events of Pentecost demonstrate that one
component of the
future kingdom program, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, was delivered
as promised,
despite the entire kingdom program’s delay. The Spirit is a down
payment, an earnest
(Eph. 1:13-14), of the glorious future inheritance of the kingdom to
come. Nevertheless,
what a down payment He is! As a mother allows her children to sample the
dough to help
them endure the grueling interim between cookie mixing and cookie
eating, God has
blessed the church with a sample taste of the coming kingdom to help us
endure these last
days prior to Christ’s assuming His appointed throne.
Acts 1:8 begins with a strong contrast, alla, a big “but,” as Jesus
changed the subject
from Israel’s future kingdom to the present responsibilities of the
apostles in Israel. Jesus,
referring back to His subject of Spirit baptism (1:4-5), prepares His
apostles for the
awesome power they would presently receive (in 2:1-4). It was by means
of this power
that they would be enabled to carry out Jesus’ orders.
The apostolic commission is to be Jesus’ witnesses. Consequently, the
concept of
witness becomes a key, perhaps the key word, in the book of Acts (1:22,
2:32, 3:15, 5:32,
10:39, 41, 13:31, 22:15, 26:16). The word translated as
witness, the
Greek martus , means
“One who testifies, bears witness, declares, confirms.” Indeed, this
witness would be
discharged by the entire church, even unto death (7:60; 22:4).
Although Acts 1:8 does not specify the proposed content of the apostolic
witness, the parallel passage at the conclusion of Luke reveals the
specifics. The apostles were commissioned to witness of the ministry of
Jesus: His life, death, resurrection and exaltation,
and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be
proclaimed in His name
to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem (Luke 24:46-47).
The phrase, you shall be my witnesses, recalls the use of that same
phrase by God
in the nation of Israel’s commission, as the corporate servant of the
Lord, to proclaim that
He is the only legitimate means of deliverance, the sole savior of His
people (Is. 43:12)
and God’s repeated use of the phrase you shall be my witnesses in
Israel’s related
commission to testify among the idolaters that the Lord is the only God
(Is. 44:8).
Jesus specifies where they will receive the Holy Spirit, Jerusalem, and
vaguely alludes to when, not many days from now. Significantly, there is no
mention made of
how the apostles will receive the Holy Spirit. No conditions whatsoever
are placed on the
apostles in preparation for the upcoming baptism of the spirit. There
are no instructions,
no uncertainties, no last minute provisos. The baptism of the Spirit
will not in any way
depend upon the apostles’ faith, attitude or behavior. The Spirit will
be the certain and
sovereign gift of God to His children (Luke 11:13).
Jesus provides broad geographic parameters for this commission to
witness. Indeed, it is these geographic designations that provide Luke’s
structural outline of his Acts narrative, as noted in the introduction.
Jesus’ commission begins in Jerusalem, extends through the rest of
Israel, Judea and Samaria, and eventually reaches
the ends of or
the
remotest part of the earth.
Jerusalem. The city of Jerusalem is mentioned 670 times within the
Hebrew
Scriptures. From the time of David, it has had an unparalleled grip on
the heart and
imagination of the Jewish people. Jerusalem is the historic and eternal
capital of the
Jewish people. By the time of the events of Acts, Jerusalem had been the
Jewish capital
for over a thousand years. From antiquity, Jews have considered
Jerusalem to be the
center, the very “navel” of the earth (Ezek 5:5; 38:12). Jerusalem has
always been the
political, economic, military, social and religious heart of the Jewish
nation and
leadership.
On the surface, there is absolutely no economic, geographical or
topological
explanation for the magnitude of Jerusalem’s significance. It has never
been a strategic
center of commerce. Jerusalem has no valuable natural resources, its
soil is not
particularly fertile and it has a limited water supply; in fact, it is
situated on the edge of
the Judean desert. The profound importance of the city to the Jewish
imagination can
only be explained with reference to the Biblical narrative.
Jerusalem played a role in Jewish history from the beginning. It was
known in the
time of Abraham as Salem (Gen.14:18) and is the location of Mount
Moriah, where
Abraham almost sacrificed Isaac (Gen. 22). Jerusalem was conquered from
the Jebusites
by David and chosen to be his capital over 3000 years ago (2 Sam. 5:7; 1 Chron. 11:5).
Jerusalem was thereafter popularly known as “the city of David.” David
relocated the
sacred ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:12) and his son,
Solomon, built the
Temple on Mount Moriah to house the ark (1 Kings 6:1).
Solomon’s Temple, along with the entire city, was destroyed by
Nebuchadnezzar, the
king of Babylon, in 586 BC (2 Kings 25; 2 Chr. 36; Jer. 39). When Israel
returned from
exile at the end of the sixth century, the Temple was modestly rebuilt
(Hag. 1:14). Five
centuries later, Herod the Great elaborately renovated and enlarged the
Temple and the
Temple Mount. In addition, he reconstructed and extensively modernized
the entire city
of Jerusalem, recreating a city of sufficient architectural splendor to
rival any other in the
entire Roman Empire.
The Hebrew Scripture eloquently conveys the key role Jerusalem plays in
Biblical
theology. The Psalms record God’s specific choice of Jerusalem as His
holy city (Ps. 2:6;
9:11; 74:2 78:68; 87:2; 102:16; 132:13). The prophets affirm that
salvation will spread to
the Gentiles from Jerusalem (Is. 37:32; 52:7; Joel 2:32; 3:16; Obad.
1:17; Zeph. 3:14) and
that the Gentiles will pilgrimage to Jerusalem to worship God in the
Temple (Is 2:2–4;
18:7; Mic. 4:2, 7; Zech. 14:16–19).
Even for those Jews living outside of Israel, Jerusalem remained a
central focus of
religious consideration as well as of sentiment. Annual pilgrimages were
made to
Jerusalem, up to three times per year, to observe the Feasts of
Passover, Pentecost and
Tabernacles. The Temple was also the only authorized location where one
could present
required sacrifices to the Lord. Even the obligation of the annual
Temple tax focused an
entire people’s attention on the city.
In the gospels, Jesus mentions Jerusalem on some fifteen occasions,
mostly in
reference to His upcoming rejection and suffering. The climax of each
gospel account
occurs with Jesus’ rendezvous with His destiny. As He lamented, despite
all the rich
theological significance of the city to the Jewish people, Jerusalem is
also the city which
kills its prophets (Luke 13:33). The gospel records make it clear that
Jerusalem was also
the center of Jewish opposition to Jesus.
Following their receipt of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, the apostles
continued their
Jerusalem residence. These former Galileans made the holy city their new
center of
ministry from which the gospel witness would advance. However, the Acts
narrative
reveals that Jerusalem would remain the center of opposition for Jesus’
disciples.
Included in the designation of Judea were also Galilee and the rest of
Israel. Samaria
was the region in Israel populated by followers of a hybrid religion
hostile to Judaism and
to the Jewish people.
The remotest part of the earth, or
ends of the earth, is the Greek
phrase heos
eschatou tes ges . This was a Jewish idiom for Gentiles, originally
derived from the
parameters of the Servant of the Lord’s mission as relayed in Isaiah
49:6. Jesus, the
definitive “Servant of the Lord,” delegated His commission to His
apostles through His
Great Commission.
Although this phrase, as used in Acts, is commonly understood to be a
reference to the capital of the Gentile world, Rome, this is far too
limited an understanding. Although the apostolic mission of traveling
over fifteen hundred miles to the then capital of Western civilization
was not chopped liver, Rome cannot be considered the limit of what Jesus
meant by the ends of the earth. To what Jesus referred in His
use of this phrase
extended far beyond Rome’s geographic boundaries, and in a broader
geographic sense
ultimately denoted the entire earth, every Jewish and Gentile community
worldwide. God
himself exclaimed to the ends of the earth, i.e., to the nations, all
mankind, that He was
the one true God (Is. 45:22)
The apostles’ initial understanding of Jesus’ commission, however, may
have been more restricted. What they most likely understood by the
phrase, ends
of the earth,
based on the context of the first fifteen chapters of Acts, was the
entire realm of the
diaspora; that they were being commissioned to take the gospel to every
Jewish
community both inside and outside of the land of Israel. Their minds may
have
automatically focused on another passage from Isaiah, where God
announced to the ends
of the earth the “good news” that salvation had come specifically to
Israel (Is. 48:20).
The gospels climaxed with Jesus’ arrival in the capital of Israel. Acts
begins in
Jerusalem and climaxes with Jesus’ church reaching the first stage of
the ends of the
earth, the exalted capital of western civilization. This fact is
certain: there is no other
possible explanation for the explosive numeric and geographic growth of
the church
within those initial decades other than for the unshakable apostolic
conviction that Jesus
is the resurrected Messiah. In the face of ostracism, persecution,
imprisonment, torture
and eventually execution, these devout but very human Jewish men
remained undeterred n carrying out their commission. The record of Acts is that the
apostles and their
disciples were witnesses of their Messiah both in word, with the
proclamation of his
resurrection, and in deed, exemplified by their mighty acts of temerity,
faithfulness and
supernatural power.
FOOTNOTES
7. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus: Complete
and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), Apion I 1.
8. P.W. Barnett, “Apostle,” in Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin,
eds., Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1993), 45-50.
9. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged
(Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), Ant. XVIII, v 2.
10. A comprehensive discussion of baptism in the NT is contained in
Richard E. Averbeck, “The Focus of Baptism in the New Testament,”
Grace Theological Journal (Grace Seminary, 2:2, Fall 1981) 266-301.
STUDY
QUESTIONS
1. What is an apostle?
2. Why or why not does Acts teach a literal future kingdom for Israel?
3. What is the importance of Jerusalem for Jews? For Christians?
