Untitled Sermon

Acts 1:1 ESV

In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach,

Acts Notes: Ch 1

The first book covered the earthly life of Jesus up to the ascension.

-Resurrection could never be in doubt: He showed himself alive by many proofs over the course 40 days.

Preaching about the kingdom was the theme of his teaching before and after resurrection

He himself describes the first volume as containing both action and teaching; so it does, and so also does the second volume, and it is likely that Luke would have claimed that both volumes contained both the basic events on which the Christian faith was founded and its fundamental doctrines.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 64.

Were the name without religious significance the matter would not be in doubt; but though as a name it is common enough (e.g. Theophilus, the Athenian comic poet of the 4th century BC; a Theophilus in Ep. Arist. 49; the father of the High Priest Matthias and the High Priest who succeeded Jonathan, Josephus, Ant. 17.78; 18.123), its meaning (Dear to God probably rather than Loving God) makes it a possible cypher intended to represent the Christian (or Christian inquirer).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 65–66.

The suggestion however that Luke’s Theophilus was an ideal or representative rather than a real person fits ill with the κράτιστε of Lk. 1:3. He may have been an inquirer, a catechumen, a Christian seeking further information about the origins of his faith and the early history of the church, or a Roman magistrate.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 66.

Ἰησοῦς ποιεῖν τε (τε is specially characteristic of Acts in the NT) καὶ διδάσκειν. ποιεῖν and διδάσκειν seem a very adequate summary both of the contents and of the interests of the Third Gospel (it could be argued, with some exaggeration indeed, that Matthew had a special interest in διδάσκειν, Mark in ποιεῖν).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 66.

Calvin emphasises the importance of both doing and teaching—‘a holy knot, which may not be dissolved’;1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 66.

Acts contains an account of the continuing work of Jesus (through the Holy Spirit, through the church); the earlier volume contains therefore only the beginning of his work.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 66.

Acts contains an account of the continuing work of Jesus (through the Holy Spirit, through the church); the earlier volume contains therefore only the beginning of his work.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 66.

Kingdom of God is used several times in Acts as a general term covering the whole of the Christian proclamation (1:3; 8:12; 19:8; 20:25 (here without God); 28:23, 31). Possibly elsewhere but very probably at this point it is used in order to establish a link between the message of Jesus after the resurrection and that which he had proclaimed during his ministry; also to prepare for v. 6.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 70.

It seems to bear, in Lk., a somewhat wider range of meaning than occurs in the other synoptic gospels; this prepares for the wider use of the phrase in Acts. It is a future good, for whose coming men may pray (e.g. Lk. 11:2), as they did in Judaism (Lk. 23:51). It is near at hand (Lk. 10:9, 11). In the presence of Jesus and his work (especially his attack on the kingdom of Satan) it may be said to have come already (Lk. 11:20). It is God’s gift to his own, who manifest that they are his own (Lk. 6:20; 9:62; 12:32), and though they suffer now they will enjoy the gift when the appointed time comes (Lk. 13:28, 29; cf. Acts 14:22).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 71.

It is impossible to answer the question when the kingdom will come (Lk. 17:20). It is an inward, spiritually possessed thing (Lk. 17:21—a verse often differently interpreted; see Marshall ad loc.). In the present verse the phrase looks forward to the question asked by the apostles in v. 6. The word βασιλεία was always open to misinterpretation in terms of earthly sovereignty (cf. 17:7); the Ascension and the gift of the Spirit were, in Luke’s view, necessary before even the chosen disciples could understand the true meaning of the kingdom.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 71.

Accordingly we should read συνᾰλιζόμενος and take it to mean eating (salt) together with them. This recalls the Lucan resurrection stories: Lk. 24:30, 31, 35, 41–43. These passages are given (a) as proof of the bodily reality of the risen Jesus and (b) as indicating a common meal as the context of his self-disclosure. In the present context no stress laid on (a), though the point is consistent with the use of τεκμήριον (v. 3); later in Acts we shall find references (2:42, 46; 20:7; 27:35) to the breaking of bread, which may suggest a special context of fellowship with Christ.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 71–72.

the reason for remaining in Jerusalem is that it is there that the disciples are to await the gift of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, emphasis upon Jerusalem as the holy place, the scene of crucifixion, resurrection (and appearances), ascension, and the gift of the Spirit is characteristically Lucan (for Conzelmann 21, ad loc., ‘Jerusalem represents the continuity between Israel and the church’).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 72.

The promise of the Father is the gift of the Holy Spirit; ἐπαγγελία is used in the sense of the thing promised; cf. Lk. 24:49; Acts 2:33 and perhaps 2:39. The promise referred to may be that quoted from Joel in 2:17–21; more probably the promise of the Father is that which the Father had spoken through Jesus.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 73.

John the Baptist had hinted at the coming of the Holy Spirit (still a matter of promise) and Jesus made the promise explicit in the present context. 1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 73.

5. ὅτι is not recitativum; it means because, for. It is assumed that the reader of Acts has read Lk. and therefore does not need to be informed about John1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 73.

The verb ἐβάπτισεν shows immediately which John is meant; Theophilus will know that he is the one who went before Jesus in the spirit and power of Elijah (Lk. 1:17), that crowds gathered to him for baptism (3:7), that he foretold coming judgment (3:7, 9) and the coming of one mightier than himself (3:4–6, 16), that he inquired whether Jesus was the Coming One (7:19), and that Jesus himself declared that among those born of women there was none greater than John the Baptist, though the least in the kingdom of God is greater (7:28). John had also made the prediction (3:16), ἐγὼ μὲν ὕδατι βαπτίζω ὑμᾶς· ἔρχεται δὲ ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου … αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί. It is probable that already in the gospel Luke envisaged the fulfilment of this prophecy in the gift of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost (though this may not have been the original meaning of the reference to wind and fire—for discussion see Marshall ad loc.), to which the present verse clearly refers, though the reference to fire is dropped1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 73–74.

The Holy Spirit is one of the major themes of Acts; some would say the central and most important theme. It is doubtless true to say that baptism in the Holy Spirit is ‘the divine preparation of man for the Christian life in its totality’ (Barth, CD 4:4:31), but the meaning of a broad statement of this kind can be brought out only by surveying as they arise the many references to the Spirit and attempting to coordinate what is meant by different expressions, such as receiving, being filled with, being baptized with, the Holy Spirit. The present verse points forward to v. 8 and to 2:4, but of baptism with the Holy Spirit it is fair to say that ‘no one synonym can do justice to its range of meaning’ (Marshall 58). There is no article with πνεύματι … ἁγίῳ because this is the first reference to the Holy Spirit; so Delebecque (3).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 74.

as the parallel between Spirit and water suggests that the Spirit is thought of as analogous to the water in which a convert is immersed or with which he is sprinkled it is proper to compare 1QS 4:211

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 74.

It is not possible (see on 2:4) to harmonize Luke’s narrative of Pentecost with the Johannine gift of the Spirit (Jn 20:22).1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 74.

There is nothing in the word κύριε to show whether it is simply a respectful term used in addressing a person of some importance or has a specific theological content. The context shows that the speakers believe that the person addressed has the power at the appropriate time to restore government to Israel, that is, to put into effect (what is believed to be) the intention of God. He is the Messiah. 1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 76.

The question shows a Jewish interest (Klausner, Jesus 402), and has been held to prove the existence of a Zealot element among the disciples of Jesus (Davies, Land 338, mentions but does not hold this view). It is nearer to the truth to say that Luke uses the question to underline the non-nationalist character of the Christian movement; the disciples asked it (thus by their failure to perceive the truth eliciting the positive statement of v. 8) before the gift of the Spirit in ch. 2. Thereafter they would be in no doubt about God’s eschatological plans, which Luke clearly understands to be universal rather than nationalist.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 76.

to point out a difference between a Jewish and the Christian understanding of the purpose of God. Restoration of the kingdom to Israel is regularly prayed for in the Eighteen Benedictions and in the Qaddish. In this verse the word βασιλεία stands by itself and probably means simply sovereignty; the apostles inquire whether Israel is once more to enjoy the wide dominion that it enjoyed in the time of David. According to Schille 71 it is necessary to supply with βασιλεία of God; this is correct only in the sense that when properly understood Israel’s sovereignty is a way of expressing God’s. It is, according to Luke, in the life of Christians that God’s sovereignty is expressed.1

1 C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 77.