Acts of the Apostles Introduction

Introduction

English Standard Version Chapter 1

Dedication to Theophilus

1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

English Standard Version Chapter 1

The Promise of the Holy Spirit

1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

This week we’re beginning our series through the Book of Acts, or what has historically been referred to as the Acts of the Apostles. Now, my goal this week is simply to introduce you to this book, to get us off on the right foot, to consider its author, its historical context, and its purpose. Now, this is important, because the better we understand the book’s historical context and it’s purpose the more interesting and applicable we’ll find the book to become. We all know how difficult it can be to study material that seems irrelevant or unimportant to us, so it’s important that we understand the context and purpose of this book in order to recognize just how relevant and important it is to the Christian life.

Sequel

Well, first, the Book of Acts does not stand alone like many of the other NT letters, but rather it’s a sequel to another book, it’s a sequel to the Gospel of Luke. In fact, the two books were originally circulated together and known collectively as simply Luke-Acts. This is evident in a couple of ways, first, both books are addressed to a person named Theophilus (of whom we have no further identifying record) in their prologue, and second, Luke references his first book at the beginning of Acts when he writes there in Acts 1:1 and says, “In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and to teach...”

Now, it wouldn’t be until the second century that the two volumes would be grouped separately. Eventually, Luke’s Gospel would be bundled with the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and John, while Acts would be bundled with the letters written by the Apostle Paul. Luke’s Gospel obviously fit well alongside the other Gospel accounts, while the Book of Acts was bundled with Paul’s letters due to its role of supporting and substantiating Paul’s apostolic ministry alongside the other Apostles. For example, had it not been for Luke’s account of Paul’s ministry in Acts (which is increasing featured beginning in Acts 7 through through the end of the book), Paul’s letters to the various churches and people would have lacked a considerable amount of context. Furthermore, Luke’s account of Paul’s conversion, calling, and ministry would have substantiated Paul’s claims in his letters to be an Apostle, by demonstrating that Paul indeed did exhibit the “signs of an apostle”. So, as time went on, the Book of Acts became a bridge between the Gospels and the NT letters. In fact, when I finished preaching through the Gospel of Matthew a couple of years ago I almost launched immediately into the Book of Acts in order to pickup the narrative where Matthew had left off.

Authorship

It’s also fairly clear that Luke, who’s described as a physician and companion of Paul elsewhere, was the author of these two volumes, given the testimony of Scripture and of the various sources throughout the 2nd and 3rd centuries. For example, Irenaeus, a Christian bishop of the 2nd century, identified Luke as a physician from Antioch, a companion of Paul, and the author of one of the Gospels and the Book of Acts. Which appears to be corroborated by the the Apostle Paul in his letter to the church in Colossae where he writes in Colossians 4:14, during his final greetings, and says, “Luke the beloved physician greets you, as does Demas.”

Furthermore, throughout the Book of Acts the author identifies himself as being present during many of the events described in the book, when he writes, at times, in the first person plural (i.e. we/us). There are at least four sections where Luke includes himself in the events he describes (Acts 16:10–17, Acts 20:5–15, Acts 21:1–18, Acts 27:1–28:16). Let me give you one example, in Acts 16, Luke records that the Apostle Paul had seen a vision indicating that they should travel to Macedonia, and then in verse 10 he says that “we immediately sought to go on to Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them.” In other words, the author of Acts indicates to his readers that he was not only an eyewitness to many of these events, but was also frequently a participant and a companion of Paul.

In fact, if Irenaeus is also correct that Luke was a physician from Antioch, then it’s possible that Luke was an early Gentile convert as the Gospel began to spread beyond the borders of Judea beginning in Antioch in Acts 11. You see, it would be through the gateway of Antioch, north of Judea in Syria, that the Apostle Paul would begin his missionary journeys to the Gentiles throughout the rest of the Roman Empire, and it wouldn’t be a stretch to surmise that Luke, at some point, joined Paul at various times during his missionary endeavors, making Luke an excellent candidate to chronicle the 30 years that followed Jesus’ ascension.

Date

Now, in light of that, it appears that the Book of Acts was written sometime in the early to mid 60’s AD. The events recorded in the last chapter of Acts (chapter 28) likely took place in AD 62, and so the book had to be written after that, but we also don’t get the impression that the Neronic persecution had begun, which likely started in AD 64, so if I had to venture an educated guess as to the date of composition for Acts I’d estimate between AD 62-64. While persecution is all throughout the Book of Acts, that persecution comes primarily at the hands or behest of the unbelieving Jews, not Rome, which we’ll consider at greater length here in a minute.

Historical narrative

Now, it’s also important that as we approach the Book of Acts that we recognize its literary genre, that just like Luke’s Gospel, the Book of Acts is what we call historical narrative. I’ve often pointed out that identifying a book’s literary genre is essential to sound interpretation. There are many literary genre’s found in the Bible, including poetry, prophecy, parable, apocalyptic, historical narrative, etc. And recognizing these differences in genre is important, because the rules of interpretation change depending upon the genre. For example, we don’t interpret historical narrative the same way we interpret poetry. Why? Because poetry employs literary devices such as parallelism, rhyme, and meter to structure its content, whereas historical narrative employs a more linear, chronological structure for the purpose of storytelling. Poetry also uses very figurative language (such as metaphors), whereas historical narrative employs very straightforward, descriptive language to convey events. Therefore, it would be disastrous to interpret poetry in the same way we interpret historical narrative, so, again, it’s essential that we recognize that Acts is a type of historical narrative. That Acts is primarily intended to recount past events, people, and places in a linear, chronological manner. In fact, Luke makes this very clear at the beginning of volume one, in his Gospel. Listen again to what he says back in Luke 1:1-4,

English Standard Version Chapter 1

1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to

Now, I think we naturally and readily tend to recognize the differences between something like poetry and historical narrative, but there are other types of literature that we don’t recognize as readily, or differentiate between as easily. For example, one type of literary genre that we often confuse with historical narrative is didactic literature. Now, don’t let the word didactic scare you, it simply means to teach. In other words, didactic literature is literature that’s specifically intended to teach or to instruct. For example, Paul’s letters in the NT are didactic in nature, they’re written to instruct churches or specific individuals, they’re filled with doctrine, what we should believe and how we should behave. Whereas, historical narrative is not primarily intended to be instructive, but to narrate events.

Description is not prescription

Now, this doesn’t mean historical narrative can’t include instruction or be instructive (e.g. when Luke records Jesus’ teachings, or when Matthew orders his narrative in such a way to make a particular point), but it does mean that the primary aim of narrative literature is to describe events. Therefore, whenever you engage with historical narrative you must always keep in mind that what’s being described isn’t necessarily being prescribed. In other words, just because Luke describes a certain event doesn’t mean we’re intended to replicate that event. Narrative is not necessarily normative.

Let me give you an example, at multiple points, Luke describes the church as meeting and breaking bread together in believer’s homes, therefore many have taken this to mean that conducting weekly worship in each other’s homes is the preferred biblical model of new covenant worship, and as a result has given rise to the modern house-church movement. However, this kind of thinking has arisen as a result of confusing description with prescription, believing that if it’s recorded for us in Acts that we therefore must emulate it, that weekly worship conducted within any other type of facility must be inferior or even forbidden.

Now, I bring this up because believers are particularly prone to do this with this book, the Acts of the Apostles. You see, there has been an enormous amount of doctrine built, especially in the last century, upon the assumption that we’re intended to emulate everything described in Acts, which has lead to a multitude of movements feverishly seeking to see the events of Pentecost and the days of the Apostles repeated, assuming that what Luke describes is normative.

In fact, I remember making this very mistake myself as an young Christian, asking questions like, “Why don’t we see the events of the first century happening in the same way today?” Unfortunately, there wasn’t anyone in my life to provide me with a biblical answer, and so I came to assume that these events were not happening in my day as a result of some deficiency in me or within the church. However, my hope is that as we study this book you’ll come to have a better understanding of the design and purpose of Pentecost and how the Apostles, commissioned by Jesus himself, were intended to lay a foundation for the church in those early decades following the ministry of Jesus.

That you may have certainty

Now, I also want us to consider the purpose of Acts, and how that purpose is intended to impact our faith. While the purpose of other books are sometimes more obscure or difficult to discern, Luke makes the purpose of his two volumes abundantly clear from the outset. If you would, read with me again back in Luke 1:1-4,

English Standard Version Chapter 1

1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Notice what Luke says there, particularly in verses 3-4, when he says, “it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,” Why? “that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.” The reason or purpose Luke is writing an orderly account for Theophilus is so that he might have certainty concerning the things he’s been taught. Therefore, when we read Luke’s account of Jesus’ ministry, and later the events of the early church we’re intended to be made certain of those events; our faith is intended to be strengthened by what what Luke records.

Verse 4 could also be translated, “that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.” In other words, Luke has provided us with an account with which we’re intended to rely, or depend upon, because they’re true. Luke’s account is intended to be a reliable account of the origins of Christianity.

When I first read this I couldn’t help but remember what Peter wrote in one of his letters to the church, in 2 Peter 1:16-18, when he sought to instill confidence within the church’s members in the face of false teachers and wrote,

English Standard Version Chapter 1

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

In other words, Acts is intended to instill within us confidence in the Gospel, that our faith is not in vain or based upon fairytales, myths, or legends, but upon real events in history, corroborated by eyewitnesses. While Luke does not claim to be an eyewitness of the events in his Gospel, he does indicate that he has access to the information which eyewitnesses could supply, that he’s put together an account based on eyewitness testimony, even within his Gospel account. Not to mention, his own eyewitness testimony incorporated throughout the Book of Acts, of which I pointed out earlier while he was a companion of the Apostle Paul during his missionary enterprise, likely for 20 years or more. In short, the Book of Acts is intended to fortify your faith as a Christian.

Church history

Similarly, this is why every Christian should become a student of church history. This is why we have our church library filled with books and lectures on church history, especially those that chronicle the lives of those Christians who came before us, those who persevered, those who conquered by the blood of the Lamb, those who remained faithful until the end, because when you see how the Spirit of God has empowered and sustained the church from age to age your own faith is built up, your own faith is strengthened, you become filled with courage, and emboldened to proclaim the Gospel yourself. You see, one of the reasons we aren’t more bold and courageous is because our faith is weak, and our faith is weak because we neglect the ordinary means of grace, we don’t read our Bibles, we don’t pray, we don’t attend worship regularly, we don’t feed on the word that’s intended to strengthen our souls, and so like a body without food we become weak and frail and prone to disease. It’s no wonder we’re not as strong and courageous as we ought to be, but my hope throughout this series is that our faith will be strengthened and emboldened as we consider Luke’s Acts of the Apostles.

The power of the Holy Spirit

And in addition to the stated purpose of Acts there are several observations that I think we’re intended to make along the way that we should look out for, but first and foremost that behind the Acts of the Apostles was the power of the Holy Spirit, or as one writer put it, how the footprints of the Holy Spirit are seen in the footprints of the Apostles. (R.C. Sproul) Acts describes how the Holy Spirit established the church despite immense persecution and resistance. Acts narrates how the Spirit of God empowered the early church, how the Holy Spirit carried the early church along like a wind filling the sails of a ship.

You see, earlier in John chapter 3 when Jesus spoke to a man named Nicodemus, one of the rulers in Israel, he described the Spirit like a wind that blows wherever it wishes, then later Jesus instructed his disciples in Acts 1:4 “not depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father” (referring to the Holy Spirit), and then in verse 8 that they would “receive power when the Holy Spirit [had] come upon them, and [that they’d] be his witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” Until finally in Acts 2:1, while the disciples were together in one place, suddenly from heaven came a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were staying.

Then from that point on Luke describes how the Spirit filled and empowered the disciples to powerfully proclaim the Gospel, whether it was Peter’s famous sermon in Acts 2 and the three thousand souls that were added to their number, or Stephen’s dispute with the Jews in Acts 6 where we’re told that “they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking,” the Holy Spirit empowered and established the church. First among the disciples, then the believing Jews, then the Samaritans, and finally the Gentiles. The power of the Holy Spirit rippled outward from Jerusalem, empowering the church and establishing the kingdom of God in the world, taking men from every nation and making them obedient to Christ in the face of the harshest opposition. Due to the power of the Holy Spirt the church was invincible. Or as the Pharisee, Gamaliel, put it when speaking to his contemporaries, “for if this plan or undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them.” (Acts 5:38-39) And, indeed, neither the Jews nor the Romans were able to put an end to the kingdom of God.

Conclusion

So, as we wrap up today my hope going forward is that as we consider the Book of Acts together in the coming months your faith will be strengthened, that your faith will be emboldened. That you will have a renewed certainty concerning the things we’ve been taught, to know that your faith is reliable and dependable, rooted in historical events, not in fairytales or myths, that your faith is not in vain, but that it’s founded upon the truth. That we would be encouraged to see how the Holy Spirit empowered and established the church despite impossible odds, and that we might have a newfound desire to discover church history, to see how the Holy Spirit has continued to sustain the church throughout the ages.

Prayer