By Steven Charles Ger

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.




Peter’s Witness (2:14-36)
a. Now that I Have Your Attention (2:14-21)
b. Jesus is Messiah (2:22-32)
c. Application (2:33-36)
Study Questions

Peter’s Witness (2:14-36)

Peter, serving as the spokesman for the apostles, who are standing with him in solidarity, will deliver a brief message that will generate profound results. With this evangelistic sermon to his Jewish brethren, Peter will, for the first time, use his keys to the kingdom (Matt. 16:19) to unlock the door of Christ’s salvation and open the fount of the Holy Spirit for the Jewish people.

Now That I Have Your Attention (2:14-21)

Like many good sermons, this one begins with a small joke. After having called for the close attention of the crowd, his first concern is to deny the accusation of drunkenness that had been levied at the apostles. His argument was that they could not possibly be drunk, as it is too early in the morning, only 9:00 AM. In Jewish culture, Jews reserved their drinking for the evening, seldom drinking at any other time of day. Furthermore, 9:00 AM was one of the three appointed Jewish times of prayer, when the morning sacrifices were being offered. In other words, regardless of reasons of propriety, Peter reminded the crowd that no Jewish bars were open for business yet, and, even so, they would be closed on this great holiday!

Having told the crowd what was not transpiring, Peter followed this good-hearted denial by telling them what was going on. He immediately launches his opening argument with a supporting Scripture.

Peter’s text is Joel 2:28-32 (Joel 3:1-5 in the Hebrew Bible). He explained that the apostles’ extraordinary abilities manifested that morning were what was spoken of through the prophet Joel (Acts 2:16). He goes on to quote the remainder of Joel’s prophecy, making a slight adjustment, however, with the insertion of the pregnant phrase, in the last days (Acts 2:17). This insertion supplies the eschatological context of the quotation for Peter’s audience. “The last days” is an ambiguous phrase used in the prophets to reference the “day of the Lord,” or its immediate aftermath (Is. 2:2; Mic. 4:1).

It seems abundantly clear from Peter’s use of Joel’s prophecy that he was stating that “the last days” had in some way been inaugurated on that very day. Peter’s insertion of the phrase the last days corresponds to the usage of the phrase by the author of Hebrews (1:2), which indicates that Peter was not the only member of the early church who believed that “the last days” had indeed begun.

Peter’s use of the Joel quotation can be divided into three parts. The first part (Joel 2:28-29) concerns the outpouring of God’s Spirit on all flesh, which will result in supernatural prophetic abilities, without respect of age or sex or class distinctions (Acts 2:17-18). Based on the new and revolutionary insight concerning Gentile salvation which Peter gleans later on in the Acts narrative (Acts 10:34), it seems a safe assumption that when he quotes the portion of Joel which mentions God’s Spirit being poured out on all flesh, what Peter actually has in mind is Jewish flesh and not all mankind.

The second part (Joel 2:30-31) concerns the associated supernatural, astronomical and geological signs which will follow the spiritual outpouring (Acts 2:19-20). This portion describes events that will occur in the great Tribulation, just prior to the establishment of the messianic kingdom. The phrase, the “day of the Lord,” is a common term used in the Bible for the Tribulation.

The last division of Joel’s prophecy (Joel 2:32) is the evangelistic promise of salvation, everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Acts 2:21). In the original Hebrew quote from Joel 2:32, the Hebrew word for Lord is YHWH, the ineffable covenant name of God. The Greek translation of this word is kyrios. By applying to Jesus this same word used for God, Peter is identifying Jesus with YHWH. Peter clarified that from now on, Jesus is the One whom Peter is calling Lord. Peter’s understanding is that Jesus freely exercises God’s authority. From the initial recorded sermon, the apostolic witness was that Jesus was to be identified with the Lord God Himself. Jesus rules with God and possesses divine authority over salvation and deliverance from sin.

Use of Joel. How Peter used Joel’s prophecy in his sermon has engendered some debate. There are two interpretations that bear consideration.

The first interpretation cautiously posits that Peter was using the Joel prophecy in an analogical sense. In other words, when Peter said, “this is what was spoken of,” what he actually meant was “this is like what was spoken of,” or “this is a similar event,” or “this is an illustration or application of what was spoken.” This interpretation’s obvious level of caution seems warranted, since none of the specific prophetic events which Joel described (the moon turning crimson, the sun blackening, etc.) actually occurred that Pentecost. Joel’s prophecy describes the final outpouring of the Spirit on the nation of Israel just prior to the inauguration of the messianic kingdom, yet the messianic kingdom was observably not dawning in the Temple that Pentecost morning while Peter was preaching.

Furthermore, the one supernatural event that did occur at Pentecost, specifically the apostles speaking in tongues, is not at all addressed within Joel’s prophecy. Nor does Joel’s prophecy address the birth of the church. According to this interpretation, Peter was pointing out that what they were experiencing was an outpouring of God’s Spirit, just as Joel wrote about, but it was not actually the specific event of which Joel wrote.

One further line of argument for this position is that Peter did not specifically state something to the effect of “and so is fulfilled Joel’s prophecy.” Peter instead chose alternate terminology to introduce the prophecy (touto estin to eiremenon), and did not use the standard language of a prophecy “fulfillment formula.”

However, the lack of an introductory “fulfillment formula” is not a compelling point, for there are a variety of introductions for quotations of Hebrew prophecy within Acts. (17) Indeed, a contemporary parallel with the linguistic formula Peter used for prophetic fulfillment has been found within the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QHab). (18)

Nonetheless, it seems that by quoting Joel, Peter intended more than to draw a similarity or a comparison. This analogical interpretation is ultimately unsatisfactory. It simply does not acknowledge the plain, straightforward fashion in which Peter declares, This is what was spoken. Peter did not say it was something, “similar to,” “an illustration of” or “like” that of which Joel wrote. Rather, Peter said, this is what was spoken of.

This leads then to the preferable second interpretation, that of an “initial fulfillment” of Joel’s prophecy. This position asserts that what Peter believed was that the preliminary stage of Joel’s prophecy was being fulfilled right then and there, as he was speaking. Thus, Peter argued for a preliminary, partial fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. This position is perhaps less cautious than the above analogical view but is more faithful to the context of Peter’s message. There is merit in taking Peter’s declaration of prophetic fulfillment at face value.

However, this preliminary fulfillment is only in reference to the first portion of the prophecy which deals with the Holy Spirit’s outpouring (Acts 2:17-18). That morning’s Pentecost experience was indisputably an outpouring of the Holy Spirit. In addition to Joel, several of the Hebrew prophets also wrote of a future age when God’s Spirit would be liberally poured out (Is. 32:15; 44:3; Jer. 31:31-33; Ezek. 39:29, etc.). Yet Peter did not state that these numerous prophetic expectations had been completely fulfilled at Pentecost. Nor does he state that there should be no expectation of a great deal more of the Spirit to be forthcoming in the future when Israel corporately repents and God inaugurates Israel’s kingdom.

What Peter appears to have been declaring is that, in a limited sense, the “spigot” of the Holy Spirit had been opened. The Pentecost experience was merely a “down payment” on Joel’s prophecy, a “taste” of God’s future blessings; a foretaste of the eventual outpouring of the Spirit upon all Israel. There is a much more extensive fulfillment of this prophecy still to be “tapped” at a later date. In no way does an initial fulfillment drain or exhaust the ultimate, future fulfillment of this prophecy. This was only “stage one!” Yet for Peter, even a limited fulfillment of the prophetic outpouring of the Spirit was still a revolutionary event; a paradigm shift in the history of God’s relationship with Israel.

This partial fulfillment also indicates the inaugural stage of the New Covenant prophesied by both Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Jer.31:31-37; Ezek. 11:14-21;.36:22-38). At Jesus’ last supper, the Passover Seder which He shared with His disciples on the evening of His betrayal, Jesus affirmed that His death would be the catalyst which would launch the New Covenant. That evening, with the breaking of unleavened bread and drinking of wine, He established the ordinance of the eucharist as a memorial to His impending sacrifice and the inauguration of a new era. That new era commenced as the New Covenant began to be fulfilled with Jesus’ distribution of His Spirit on Pentecost.

This view is careful to recognize that there has been no fulfillment, in any sense, of any portion of the second segment of Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:19-20). These astronomic cataclysms are to occur immediately prior to the inauguration of the messianic kingdom. It was obvious to every Jew standing in the Temple that sunny May morning that these signs and wonders were still to be fulfilled. Yet the promise of these cataclysms, cited by Peter, would have been compelling incentive to urge the assembled crowd to positively respond to their messiah.

Jesus is Messiah (2:22-32)

As the initial evangelistic sermon in Acts, indeed, as the first sermon Luke reports, Peter’s message is foundational to the book and sets the stage for every other sermon that follows in the narrative. Peter straightforwardly witnessed that Jesus was the Messiah of Israel.

After getting the crowd’s attention by quoting Joel to establish that the last days had begun, Peter commenced his witness of Jesus. Knowledge of Jesus was widespread in Israel and Peter, capitalizing on this common knowledge, began by discussing the public
ministry of Jesus. He argued that Jesus was openly authenticated as God’s anointed choice through His performance of miracles, wonders and signs (Acts 2:22). These miracles, wonders and signs provocatively demonstrated God’s power and validated to Israel that Jesus was God’s messenger who spoke God’s message. This point is central to Acts and variations of the phrase “wonders and signs” will appear throughout the narrative (Acts 2:19, 22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 7:36; 8:6; 14:3). Peter’s use of the phrase “wonders and signs” would have reminded his audience of Moses (Deut. 34:10-12). Later, in his follow-up Temple sermon in the next chapter, Peter will be much more explicit in his connection of Jesus to Moses (Acts 3:22-23).

Peter’s message immediately moved to Jesus’ execution. Peter pointed out that Jesus’ death did not take God by surprise, making reference to God’s “foreknowledge” (a theological concept Peter also mentions in 1 Peter 1:2, 20).

Then, in one brief sentence, Peter cogently answered the profound question of who was responsible for the death of the Messiah. From one perspective, Jesus was delivered over to His death by God Himself. It was an inevitable part of His predetermined plan from the beginning.

From a different perspective, Peter laid the blame for Jesus’ crucifixion squarely upon the Jewish people. Peter’s “you” was pointed directly at the Jewish people and their leaders. It was the “you and your leaders” who “fastened him.” (In Acts, the apostles avoid employing the term stavros, “cross,” which was a horribly offensive word to Jewish ears. Here Peter simply lets prospegnumi, “fastened” stand alone, without specifying to what Jesus was fastened). From yet another perspective, the Romans, the godless “men without law,” Pilate and his soldiers, were the instruments of Jesus’ execution.

The sermons of Acts, whether from Peter, Stephen or Paul, are studded throughout with harsh accusations that the Jews have murdered their Messiah. These accusations are similar in style and tone to others found throughout the Hebrew prophets and always have the intent of calling the nation to repentance, that they may be forgiven their grievous sins and be saved. Additionally, the sermons in Acts are addressed to that particular generation of Jews who rejected their Messiah.

Even so, these verses have been used for two millennia by Jew-haters, both within and without the church, by both the ignorant and the educated, as proof-texts that label all Jews throughout time as “Christ-killers.” These charges of deicide and bloodguilt have caused the Jewish people to experience unimaginable persecution and suffering, often at the hands of Christians and to the shame of the Church. It is essential to remember that according to Scripture, not only Jews were responsible for the death of Christ; the Romans also shared responsibility. Indeed, the entire world, all humanity shares in the blame and, ultimately, God Himself was responsible for the predetermined death of His Son.

Peter was not pointing his finger at either the Jews or the Romans; rather, he was pointing his finger toward the resurrected Christ. However, the responsibility for Jesus’ death pales in comparison to the power of His resurrection. The agony of death was terminated for Jesus by the superior power of God, who raised Him up again (Acts 2:24).

Peter’s reference to the resurrection leads him to his second use of prophetic Scripture in support of his argument. Peter’s quotation is from Psalm 16:8-11, a messianic psalm written by King David approximately one thousand years earlier.

The specific circumstances attending David’s composition of this psalm are unknown. However, it begins with David’s plea for God’s preservation of his life (Ps.16:1). It continues with praise of God’s mercy (Ps.16:2) and goodness (Ps.16:3, 5-7) and comments on the hopelessness of others foolish enough to worship other gods instead of the one true God (Ps.16:4).

David concludes the psalm with a confirmation of confidence in the Lord’s sustenance of his flesh and his soul, both in the present and beyond death (Ps.16:8-11). It is this concluding section, specifically 16:8-11, to which Peter made reference.

Peter manifestly affirmed the prophetic aspect of David’s writing. Without mincing words, Peter reminded his audience of David’s prophetic capacity (Acts 2:30) and argued that David, both king and prophet, actually had written the psalm in the first person voice of the Messiah, his descendent. Furthermore, when Peter introduced the passage with for David says of Him (Acts 2:25), he was not just stating that David was writing prophetically, personifying the future Messiah. He was also making the astonishing claim that David, writing one thousand years earlier, was consciously aware that his subject was the Messiah’s resurrection.

Peter boldly and confidently argued that David could not possibly have been writing about himself. David died, was buried, and most assuredly had not been resurrected. In fact, his prominent tomb was just down the road in the city of David (Acts 2:29). Anyone in Jerusalem could see this for a fact. Coincidentally, according to a commonly accepted Jewish tradition, David’s death was on Pentecost. (The ancient tomb of David, located in the city of David [1 Kg. 2:10] was destroyed by the Romans a few decades later, in 70 AD. To date, the exact site of the tomb’s ruins still remains a mystery, although the general area is known. One fact is certain, however; the location of the authentic site is over a mile away from the traditional site, conveniently located directly beneath the traditional “upper room” and regularly visited by contemporary tourists!)

God had established an indissoluble covenant with David in which David was promised that one of his descendants would forever rule over Israel (2 Sam.7:12-13; Ps.132:11; Ps.89:3–4). Peter’s point is that the Holy Spirit enabled David to look ahead into the future and understand precisely how God’s Davidic Covenant promise of an eternal throne was to be fulfilled. God showed David that an eternal throne and an unending dynasty required an immortal descendant. David had been allowed to see the future Anointed One, the Messiah, the One who would neither decompose nor be abandoned to the abode of the dead (Greek Hades, Hebrew Sheol). After resting in the grave and abiding in Hades, the Messiah, paradoxically, would still live forever. To fulfill the Davidic Covenant, this Son of David would of necessity need to be resurrected.

Son of David. In first century Israel, the title “son of David” conveyed a potent political charge. It was widely understood to refer to an idealized political revolutionary who would cast off the shackles of Roman oppression, judge the wicked and purge evil from the midst of Israel. Israel enthusiastically anticipated that the dynasty of David would be restored and the kingdom of Israel made glorious. This expectation, based on the Hebrew prophets (Jer. 23:5-8; Is. 11:1-16), is widely espoused throughout first century Jewish literature, including the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Jesus conducted His ministry amidst this whirlwind of amplified Davidic anticipation. In fact, one of the foremost messianic titles ascribed to Jesus in the New Testament is “Son of David.” This designates Jesus as the recipient of all the promises God had made to David concerning the future and eternal government of one of his descendents. It specifies Jesus to be a royal, majestic messiah who is entitled by birthright to rule and reign over all Israel.

During Jesus’ earthly ministry, while He certainly accepted this title as applicable to Himself (Matt. 9:28; 20:32; Mark 10:49), He abjectly refused to be drawn into either political intrigue or revolutionary activity. While Herod the Great feared the one who was born king of the Jews (Matt. 2:2), and although He was crucified as king of the Jews (Luke 23:38), Jesus forcefully proclaimed that His kingdom, at least for the present time, was not of this world (John 18:36).

According to the teaching of the apostles, the Son of David concept is primarily applicable to Jesus’ future function as king of the earth, as He reigns from His father David’s throne in Jerusalem. Although the particular title “Son of David” is never actually articulated within Acts, the concept is specifically linked to Jesus by both Peter (Acts 2:30) and Paul (Acts 13:23). The Son of David concept was an important theological component within the presentations of both apostles when addressing a Jewish audience.

Peter incorporated this dynamic element into his argument as he approached the climax of His evangelistic proclamation. Now that Jesus’ messianic identity had been clearly demonstrated through His resurrection, ascension and exaltation to the right hand of God, it was only a matter of time before He returned to claim His birthright, the throne of David, and finally institute the messianic kingdom (Acts 2:30-36; 3:19-21).

Peter’s citation of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-31 is one of the clearest examples in the New Testament of the specific fulfillment of messianic prophecy. There is no other way to interpret Peter’s affirmation. Empowered and infused with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), Peter could not have been mistaken in his interpretation, neither could he have been creatively or imaginatively appropriating the psalm to fit his theological purpose. With vibrant confidence, he preached that morning to thousands of his people that one of the most exalted and revered figures in their history, David, in one of the most sacred portions of the Hebrew Scripture, the Psalms, had prophesied that the Messiah would be resurrected.

Having established his point concerning the necessity of the Messiah’s resurrection, Peter spelled out exactly of whom David wrote. He doesn’t just reveal that it was Jesus; rather, Peter frontloaded the word order of his pronouncement to emphatically emphasize that it was “this Jesus,” touton ton Iesoun, whom God resurrected.

At this point, Peter then revealed the stunning connection between himself and Jesus; the connection which would explain why he and his companions had been so powerfully visited by the Holy Spirit. There in the Temple courts, to an audience of thousands, Peter
identified himself and his companions as personal eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection.

Application (2:33-36)

Wrapping up his sermon, Peter advanced to the practical application. He explained that this resurrected Jesus, God’s anointed one, was now exalted in glory at the right hand of God. “The right hand of God,” was an expression commonly understood to refer to the presence of God Himself. The concept originated in Psalm 110:1, the next Scripture that Peter cites. Jesus used the comparable the right hand of power in reference to Himself (Matt. 26:64; Mark 14:62), and it was a frequently employed phrase within the New Testament to emphasize Jesus’ exaltation (Acts 2:33; 7:55-56; Rom. 8:34; Col. 3:1; Heb. 10:12; 1 Pet 3:22).

Jesus had received from His Father the promise of the Spirit (Acts 1:4) and subsequent to His exaltation at the “right hand of God” had liberally poured out the Spirit on the apostles, resulting in that day’s spectacular events. It is of note that all three members of the Trinity are active in distinct manner within verse 2:33; the Holy Spirit had proceeded from Jesus as a direct result of His resurrection and exaltation by the Father.

Peter bolstered his claim of Jesus’ exaltation by once again relying on a prophecy of David (Acts 2:34-35). Psalm 110:1 is the most frequently cited messianic prophecy in the New Testament. Peter stands firmly within Jewish tradition in interpreting this passage as
referring to the messiah. It has a long pedigree of being so interpreted within rabbinic literature (albeit, never with reference to Jesus). Peter demonstrated that Jesus’ exaltation fulfilled this prophecy.

There are three individuals referred to within this psalm. There are the two individuals who are called “Lord,” and there is the author, David. In English translation it is more difficult to perceive the messianic dynamic of the psalm than in Hebrew, primarily because David, in reference to these two individuals, used two different words, both of which are translated as “lord.” The first “Lord,” is the name YHWH and refers to the covenant making God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The second “Lord” is the Hebrew adonai. This second “lord,” adonai, is the individual whom David called “my Lord.”

If the first “Lord” refers to God and the second “Lord” is David’s lord, then, obviously, neither of these “lordly” individuals could have been David. Indeed, it was universally accepted that David had neither been resurrected nor had he ascended into heaven. This raises the question, if God is the first Lord, and David is the “my” of “my Lord,” then just who is David’s Lord? Jesus Himself had vexed the Pharisees by posing this perplexing issue (Matt. 22:44-45). Certainly, while he lived, David had no mortal lord. As the undisputed sovereign of all Israel, his only Lord was God Himself.

The answer to this prophetic riddle, Peter reveals, is, of course, Jesus. He announced to the whole house of Israel, that through God’s exaltation of Jesus they might be supremely confident that this Jesus, whom the Jewish nation had crucified, had been exalted by God and proclaimed to be both Lord and Christ.

Peter, in universally addressing every Jew, the whole house of Israel, assuredly does not shy away from emphasizing the guilt of the entire Jewish nation for their responsibility in Jesus’ crucifixion.

Although, as discussed above, every man is responsible for the death of the Messiah, Peter is not addressing every man; his audience consisted entirely of Jews. Therefore, he was specifically and pointedly emphasizing Jewish guilt. Although the gospel accounts
unambiguously report that Jesus’ death sentence resulted from the actions of a handful of the Jewish leadership, it is clear from Peter’s assignation of guilt that God intended to hold the people responsible for the horrific actions of their leaders. (This is perhaps a general truth citizens of all nations would be wise to heed!)

What Peter meant in his climactic disclosure that God had made Jesus both Lord and Christ, or Messiah, was that Jesus’ true identity has now finally been revealed. The Jewish people had believed Him to be a mere man, indeed, one worthy of an ignoble execution. However, now, through His exhibition of power in His resurrection and glorious exaltation to the right hand of God, it was clear that Jesus is the reflection of God’s essential nature. He is, therefore, supremely worthy of both titles, Lord and Christ.

Christ. The term, Christ, is a transliteration of the Greek word, “christos,” which means “anointed one.” A word with the identical meaning is “messiah,” which is likewise a transliteration of the Hebrew word, “mashiach.” In the Hebrew Scripture, it generally signifies one who, upon assumption of a sacred office, is specially consecrated (set apart for God) by anointing with oil. This was performed, for example, upon installation of prophets, priests and kings (Ex.28:41; 1 Sam.9:15–16; 10:1; 16:3, 12–13; 1 Chron. 29:22).

What was the Jewish expectation of the Messiah? Contrary to what many understand, in first century Judaism, there was no monolithic perception concerning the coming Messiah. The Messianic ideal in the first century was be no means static and was still in development. Within this state of flux, the scope of messianic expectation stretched over a broad range of possibilities.

There existed the portrait of messiah as the idealized Davidic king who would be God’s conquering warrior, vanquishing nations and establishing the primacy of Israel. There was the portrait of the messiah as an ultimate priestly leader who would die on behalf of his people. There was a imaginative dual rendering, of two separate but related messiahs; one messiah destined to die, and one destined to conquer. Then there was the mysterious and enigmatic super-human figure, mystically elevated to a semi-divine status. Finally, there is even indication, in certain limited circles, that there was no specific messianic hope at all.

“Christ,” or “Messiah,” is Luke’s most frequently used title for Jesus, occurring some twenty-five times in Acts. Roughly half of these are direct quotations from Peter or Paul’s sermons in which Christ is used as Jesus’ title, i.e., “Jesus the Messiah.” The other half are Luke’s narrative descriptions of the church’s evangelistic efforts to persuade people that Jesus is the Christ, the Jewish messiah. In both usages, the testimony of Acts is vividly clear that Jesus is the fulfillment of Jewish messianic expectation, and then some! Although He shattered the confines of pre-existing descriptive categories, the Messiah whom God sent to His people turned out to be a much more spectacular figure than anyone had previously imagined.


3. Why and how did Peter quote from Joel in his Pentecost sermon?
4. According to Peter, who was responsible for killing the Messiah?
5. Based on Peter’s sermon, why is Jesus the Messiah?
6. Define the word “christ.”
7. What was the first century Jewish expectation of Messiah?


17. Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., The Uses of the Old Testament in the New (Chicago: Moody Press, 1985) 91 as well as Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, second edition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 70-71.
18. Darrell L. Bock, “A Theology of Luke-Acts,” in Roy B. Zuck and Darrell L. Bock, eds., A Biblical Theology of the New Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 142.

Steven Charles Ger, Th.M., is a fourth generation Jewish believer. In addition to Acts: Witnesses to the World, his body of work includes a biblical commentary on Hebrews and co-authorship of The Popular Bible Prophecy Commentary. He is also a contributing author to The Gathering Storm and the Zondervan KJV Commentary: Old Testament. He is the former host of the weekly radio show, "The Jewish Heart of Christianity," and has appeared as a guest expert on both radio and television. Steven's main work is directing Sojourner Ministries, an organization dedicated to exploring the Jewish heart of Christianity.

Steven has led 11 tours to Israel and has done on-site research in the actual locations found in the Book of Acts. Autographed copies of Acts: Witnesses to the World may be purchased from the Sojourner Ministries website at

Return to Home Page