Acts from Scratch

The New Testament for Beginners

Donald L. Griggs, Paul W. Walasky

• Publisher: Westminster John Knox Press
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9780664237936
• eBook ISBN: 9781611645309
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Studi biblici

Building on the foundation of the popular volumes The Bible from Scratch: The Old Testament for Beginners and The New Testament for Beginners, Donald Griggs and Paul Walaskay offer a new study on the book of Acts.

In seven chapters, Griggs and Walaskay tell the story of this popular New Testament book, with its stories of the works of Jesus' disciples after his death, resurrection, and ascension. A leader's guide and participant section are included, making this volume an excellent resource for group or individual study.

Part One

PARTICIPANT’S GUIDE

PAUL W. WALASKAY

Preface to Part One

What Kind of Book Is Acts?

Luke, a first-century Christian author, wrote two volumes that take up about one quarter of the New Testament. In his first book, the Gospel of Luke, he wrote a biography of Jesus from his humble birth in Bethlehem to his tragic death and ascension in Jerusalem. Luke’s second book, the Acts of the Apostles, is our earliest historical account of the Christian movement from its birth in Jerusalem to its expansion into major cities of the Roman Empire.

The Acts of the Apostles is unlike any other book in the New Testament. The title of the book says something about its content. Think about words associated with “acts”: activities, actions, actors. Acts is the earliest-known written history of the Christian movement,¹ which covers the activities, actions, and actors in the Christian community from the ascension of Jesus (about 33 CE²) to the arrival of Paul³ in Rome (about 60 CE). The first half of Acts deals primarily with the early days of this Christian sect of Judaism.⁴ The locus of activity is in and around Jerusalem, and the main actors are Jesus’ principal apostles Peter and John, and James the brother of Jesus. The second half of Acts focuses on Paul and his mission to Gentiles living in major urban centers of the Roman Empire. By the time we reach the end of Luke’s two volumes it becomes clear that his goal was to describe the epic journey of the Gospel from its humble beginnings in the backwaters of the eastern Roman Empire, the town of Bethlehem, to the heart of the empire, the city of Rome. Toward the end of his narrative he writes: “And that’s how we got to Rome” (28:14, author’s translation).

Those who began the process of arranging the books of the New Testament⁵ into a collection (our New Testament canon) had a problem with Acts. They knew that Luke’s Gospel and Acts belonged together, but so did the four gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They also realized that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were similar in content and structure and that the Gospel of John was distinctly different. In the final form of the New Testament Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the “synoptic Gospels”)⁶ were placed first in the canon followed by John (the “spiritual Gospel”). Next came the Acts of the Apostles. Its placement in the canon serves as a link between the Gospels and the letters. Like the double-faced Roman god Janus (think January), Acts looks backward and forward at the same time. Acts looks back on the Gospel tradition (stories about Jesus) and at the same time it looks forward to the New Testament letters (especially the letters of Paul).

What Kind of Historian Was Luke?

The answer to this question depends on who is asking the question and when. For the first seventeen centuries of church life, readers of Acts assumed that Luke chronicled events exactly as they occurred. Beginning in the eighteenth century, readers influenced by the Enlightenment began to wonder about some of the inconsistencies, exaggerations, and inaccuracies in Acts.⁷ In the twentieth century, Bible scholars concluded that Luke was more theologian than historian. Luke was engaged in writing salvation history. If his history was sometimes faulty, it was because he had more pressing concerns—theological, pastoral, ethical, and even political.

Recent scholars reaffirm that Luke was indeed a historian, and we ought to cut him some slack. He should not be measured against twenty-first-century historiography. It is clear from reading other historians of antiquity that Luke holds himself rigorously to the standards of his contemporaries. Lucian of Samosata suggested that after the historian has painstakingly collected as much material as necessary for his study, he should organize his raw materials into a “series of notes, … as yet with no beauty or continuity. Then, after arranging them into [chronological] order, let him give it beauty and enhance it with the charms of expression, figure, and rhythm…. The task of the historian … is to give a fine arrangement to events and illuminate them as vividly as possible.”⁸ The ancient historian was not Joe Friday who wanted “just the facts.” ⁹ The historian was more than a chronicler. He was also an apologist¹⁰ for the people, movements, and events he recorded.

Now read Luke’s preface to his Gospel (Luke 1:1–4)—words that describe his process for writing both the Gospel and Acts. It is clear that he intended to follow the conventions of his time regarding good historiography. It is also clear that with these two volumes Theophilus received his money’s worth.

Here is another thing to remember as we read Acts. Luke was firmly in control of the content and form of information that the reader receives. As we noted above, a historical narrative is more than just a series of events beaded on the thin thread of time. The historian is selective in what he or she chooses to convey or not convey. A historical narrative is also an interpretation of what has happened. Therefore what we know of the earliest Christian community by reading Acts has been filtered through Luke’s mind and sifted by his predilections and passions. In Acts we can see that he has stitched together stories, speeches, letters, and a travel diary. In order to add interest and color, he sometimes used hyperbole, invention, and connective commentary. His intent was not just to recount raw data of events but to convey a vibrant and convincing story—the “good news”—the story of God’s salvation for all creation beginning with ancient Israel and continuing within the Christian community.

Finally, there will be times in reading Acts when you will need to put the book down and remind yourself that Luke is writing from a first-century urban imperial Roman perspective and you are reading within your own very specific twenty-first-century [fill in your own cultural milieu] perspective. These are two exceedingly different worldviews. Therefore on occasion we will need to do some interpretive work to bridge that gap. This book is an attempt to aid you in that task.

Who Was Luke?

The book of Acts is an anonymous piece of New Testament literature. Since the second century, readers have deduced that the author was Luke the beloved physician and companion of Paul. They arrived at this conclusion based on two pieces of evidence. The last half of Acts contains details about Paul’s journey to Rome (16:10–17, 20:5–21:18, and 27:1–28:16) that are written from the perspective of a travel companion. The voice of the narrator has shifted from the impersonal third person (he, she, they) to the personal first person (I, we). In doing this the narrator suggests that he is part of the action as a travel companion of Paul, though we still do not know the name of this travel companion. Early readers of Acts then carefully read Paul’s letters to see if a name popped up that might fit, and voilà, in a personal letter to Philemon (24) Paul mentions Luke his “fellow worker.” Paul also identifies Luke as a “beloved physician” in his letter to the Colossians, and finally, in a pastoral letter to Timothy, Paul laments that his friends have abandoned him in a Roman prison: “Only Luke is with me” (2 Tim. 4:11). The evidence appears to point to Luke, a companion of Paul, as the author of the Acts of the Apostles.¹¹

The book of Acts reveals information about its characters, including the author. We can deduce that Luke was a member of the artisan class in the Roman Empire and as such was neither poor nor rich. He was on good terms with at least one member of the upper class, his patron Theophilus. He had a sophisticated literary style, able to shift dialect from the Greek of fourth century BCE (the language of Scripture¹² used in Luke’s church, analogous to our King James English Bible) to first century CE koine (common) Greek used throughout the Roman Empire. For example, Jesus speaks to Paul in the archaic “biblical” Greek of the Septuagint and Paul responds in contemporary koine Greek (Acts 26:14–18). Why do you think Luke had Jesus (and his earliest followers, the twelve apostles) speak like this?

Luke was deeply concerned that Christians be understood by the social and official elite of the day. Coupled with this, he was concerned that his community would embrace its diversity, nurture its unity, and remember its roots in Judaism. This new Jewish sect deserved to be respected and protected by Roman law.

Luke was a cultural and cosmopolitan (in the large sense of the term “cosmos”) theologian. According to Luke, God is at work in the world through the actions of Jesus and his disciples, which constitute the church. Moreover, one can see evidence of the divine in and through various aspects of contemporary culture—economics, politics, law, religion, philosophy, and art.

What Is Acts About?

In a nutshell, Acts is about us: Christians. It addresses where we came from, who we are, and where we are going—past, present, future.

Where did we come from? Luke recounts the story of the church’s journey from provincial Jerusalem to the capital of the empire, Rome. The church is built on the foundation of Moses (the law) and Israel’s prophets, of Jesus and his apostles, and of Paul and the missionaries to the Gentiles. They proclaim a message of God’s grace and redemptive purpose for the world.

Why is the church like it is? Luke describes the process of a small Jewish community growing into a predominantly Gentile sect of Judaism, which must have seemed strange to first-century leaders within official Judaism and imperial Rome. The apostles (Jewish Christians of Galilee and Judea) and Paul (representing Gentile Christians of major urban areas in the empire) together constitute the great foundation of the Christian message and mission. Gentiles and Jews are full and equal partners in this new sect of Judaism.

Where is the church going? Trajectories into the future have been set in motion by Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles. Very strangely, Luke concluded his narrative by leaving his readers up in the air. Paul is under house arrest in Rome, awaiting a hearing before Roman authorities. While we readers would like a nice, tidy Hollywood ending, Luke did not provide one. The road ahead is known only by God.

Major Themes in the Book of Acts

From the very first chapter of Acts it is clear that the Holy Spirit is a major feature. Luke used the term far more often than any other writer in the New Testament: twelve times in his Gospel and forty-three times in Acts. By comparison the other three Gospels used the term fifteen times, and Paul used it seventeen times in his letters. This is a clear indication that for Luke, the Spirit of God, that same spirit that motivated and inspired the prophets of ancient Israel, is vitally active in the life of the Christian community. It was both the mark of divine authentication and the driving force that helped the community not only to survive but to thrive. From the beginning of Acts (1:2) to its end (28:25) the Holy Spirit plays a vital role in shaping and sustaining the Christian community.

One of the virtues that Luke espouses is Christian unity. The community speaks with one voice. This does not mean that there are not differences of opinion (read Acts 15), but ultimately agreement is found and the unity part of community is maintained. It is important to note that Luke considered Christianity to be a sect (hairesis) of Judaism (Acts 24:5, 14¹³; 28:22), the Christian (Messianist) branch. Luke understood that this sect walked a fine line between adherence to the rules and customs of its spiritual mother and a growing conviction that its role within Judaism was to fulfill Isaiah’s prophecy, which stated that this new iteration of Israel was called to be a “light to the nations [which can also be translated as “Gentiles”]” (Isa. 42:6; 49:6; 60:3). In this new Jewish sect there was an ever-expanding understanding of what constitutes community. It was this expanding diversity that put severe strains on the early Christian community. They asked many questions: How do we include, with hospitality, people of various ethnic and religious backgrounds, people who have been traditionally seen as outcasts (Samaritans), people from different social strata? What about the role of women? How do we treat the ill and infirm? Are there limits to this expansive attitude? How inclusive should this sect of Judaism be? What does any of this have to do with the teachings of Jesus, the prophets, and Torah? And finally, does unity mean uniformity? We will see Luke and his community struggle with these issues throughout the book of Acts.

There are a number of additional themes in Acts that carry over from Luke’s first volume. Included among these are the importance of Jerusalem; the centrality of worship and prayer in the life of the community; the importance of sharing communal, emotional, spiritual, and economic re...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Part 1: Participant’s Guide
• Part 2: Leader’s Guide
• Appendix