The Forms Within the Gospels
C. To Jerusalem and then to Rome ( 19:21-28:31)61
To correctly interpret a particular episode in Acts, therefore, we should first of all correlate that episode to its place in Luke’s unfolding outline and developing themes. This will help us to see Luke’s primary purposes and to avoid secondary elements in the episode that he did not intend to resolve. Two excellent examples appear in chap. 8. The two main episodes of this chapter involve: (1) the conversion and baptism of the Samaritans, with their ring leader Simon Magus (8:5-25), and (2) the conversion and baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch on the road to Gaza (8:26- 39). In light of modern debates about water baptism, baptism in the Spirit, and eternal security, readers of Acts today usually raise such questions as: Why didn’t the Spirit come immediately when the Samaritans believed Philip’s preaching? Was Simon Magus ever really saved, and, if so, did he lose his salvation? Is it significant that Philip baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch as soon as the chariot in which they are riding passes a sufficiently large body of water?
Although all of these are legitimate questions, probably none was in Luke’s mind as he penned this chapter of Acts. This passage occurs in the section of his outline that concentrates on how the gospel began to leave exclusively Jewish terri- tory. Thus, the two most striking features of Acts 8 become the reception of Philip’s message first by Samaritans and then by a eunuch, both considered ritually unclean by orthodox Jews. The main applications of Acts 8 for Christian living today, therefore, should not center on the timing of the arrival of the Holy Spirit and its effects, nor
61R N Longenecker, “Acts,” in ExpMtor% BibleComtnentay9 (1981), 234, with a few modifications..
Genres of the New Testament
on debates about how much water one needs for baptism, or how quickly it should follow on conversion. Rather, these texts should call all Christians today to deter- mine who the Samaritans and eunuchs are in our world. Christian ministry must not neglect today’s “untouchables” or outcasts-AIDS victims, the homeless, un- wed mothers, and the like.
Thinking vertically also involves treating Luke-Acts as one unit. Identifiable redactional or theological emphases in Luke’s Gospel will probably recur in Acts and should be given special attention. The theme of Jesus’ compassion for outcasts identified above certainly fits in this category. So, too, does Luke’s emphasis on the role of the Holy Spirit and of prayer in believers’ lives.62 Thus, we should not pass lightly over those texts in which the church in a given community gathers and prays for God’s guidance, seeking to be “of one accord” (1:14; 2:46; 4:24; 5:12). In an age when many Christians strongly voice their desire to imitate the “New Testa- ment church,” very few follow a process of decision-making that seeks unanimity or near-unanimity through prolonged prayer meetings of an entire body of believers.
Yet that is the consistent pattern of Acts!
By comparing Luke and Acts we are also able to discern structural or thematic parallels even apart &om any comparison of Luke with the other Gospels. Frequently, the disciples in Acts closely imitate some facet of our Lord’s life as described in Luke. Consider, for example, some of the first Christian miracles. The story of Aeneas (9:32-35) very closely resembles Jesus’ healing of the paralytic in Lk 5:17- 26, right down to the very wording, “get up and take your mat. . . .” Raising Tabitha from the dead (Acts 9:3643) uncannily parallels Jesus raising Jairus’ daugh- ter in Lk 8:4042,49-56. In fact, the Aramaic commands to the two dead women probably varied by only one letter-TUtha cum (“little girl, arise”) and Tab&ha cum (“Tabitha, get up”)!
Or compare the closing chapters of Luke and Acts. The Gospel ends with a long and detailed focus on Jesus’ passion and death. In fact, Lk 9:51 intro- duces the theme of Jesus journeying toward Jerusalem and the cross earlier than does any other Gospel. Acts, too, slows down its narrative substantially to focus on Paul’s final, fateful journey to Jerusalem and the sufferings and im-
\ prisonments that await him there, in Caesarea and in Rome. Luke may or may not have been writing after Paul’s eventual death, but he certainly sees paral- j lels in the closing stages of the lives of both Jesus and Paul. These kinds of f” similarities between Luke and Acts suggest that Luke saw the life of a faithful F disciple as often imitating that of Christ, both in its spiritual power and in the necessity of suffering.63 What was true for Paul should therefore be true for us.
Unfortunately, the combination of these themes is not often found in contem- porary Christianity; those who successfully emphasize the one usually tend to play down the other.
62Cf. A. A. Trites, “The Prayer Motif in Luke-Acts” in Penpectiws in Luke-Acts, ed. C. H. Talbert (Danville: AABPR, 1978), 168-86.
63C. H. Talbert, “The Way of the Lukan Jesus: Dimensions of Lukan Spirituality,” PRS9 (1982):
237-49. *
348 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation
The Significance of Pentecost
Proper interpretation of Acts also requires an appreciation of the significance of the events of Acts 2. This marks the crucial turning point between the age of the Mosaic covenant and the age of the new covenant, which was made possible by Jesus’ atoning death, vindicating resurrection, and exaltation to the right hand of the Father (Acts 1: l-l 1). Careful exegesis necessitates a mediating view between, say, the extremes of traditional dispensationalism and unqualified covenant theol- ogy. In other words, the student must avoid interpretations that exaggerate either the continuity or the discontinuity between the two ages.& Luke’s understanding of Peter’s speech concerning the mlfillment of Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:14-21; cf.
Joel 2:28-32) strongly suggests that a new, previously unavailable spiritual empow- erment will henceforth characterize the lives of Jesus’ followers. For example, the baptism and indwelling of all believers by the Spirit (2:38-39; cf. 1 Cor 12:13) and the phenomenon of tongues (2:5-12; 1044-46; 194-7) mark a significant break from OT times. Though they do not recognize it immediately or without conflict, these first Christians come to believe that Jewish and Gentile believers alike no longer need observe laws of the OT apart from their fulfillment in Christ (10:1-l 1: 18;
15: l-29). Thus, one must be careful, for example, not to assume that Acts 1:22-26 offers a model for how Christians should make decisions. Although “casting lots”
was a common and proper practice in the OT era (cf. Lev 168; Num 26:55; Neh 10:34), it never reappears in the NT. Indeed, the giving of the Spirit that immedi- ately follows this episode probably is meant to replace methods such as lots for Christian decision-making.65
On the other hand, interpreters must guard against driving too great a wedge between the days before and after Pentecost. Though we may not cast lots today, we should not accuse the first disciples of having erred when they practiced this method. The notion that Paul was God’s true choice for Judas’ replacement rather than Matthias finds no exegetical support in any NT text.66 And the concern for prayer and unity that preceded the use of lots clearly continues on beyond Pentecost.
In not exaggerating the discontinuity between old and new ages, the student must also beware of minimi *zmg the positive value of Acts on the grounds that it re- flects a transitional period between covenants. 67 Of course, Acts does describe transi- tions. Where the disciples had not yet fully come to appreciate their freedom in Christ, we must be cautious about imitating their behavior, as, for example, when the Hebraic
64Dispensationalism has taken great strides away from the excesses of past generations toward a more “centrist” position. Covenant theology, too, has made similar though often not as significant overtures. A helpful volume contrasting state-of-the-art perspectives of both camps is Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship betuxzen the Old and New Testaments, ed. J. S. Feinberg (Westchester: Crossway, 1988).
65D. J. Williams, Acts (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 19851, 17.
&Contra G. C. Morgan, me Acts of the Apostles (New York: Revell, 19241, 19-20.
“As classically in dispensationalism (see, e.g., M. R. de Haan, Pentecost and After [Grand Rap- ids: Zondervan, 19641, 8>, but as widely practiced by others, too.
Genres of the New Testament 349
Jews in Jerusalem insist that Paul continue to support the sacrificial cult (Acts 2 1: 17- 26).68 But such caution comes from sensitivity to Luke’s own clues as a narrator as to what God approved and what he did not. As with many sections of OT historical nar- rative, students need to look for hints in the text
itself
concerning what it presents as a good, bad, or neutral example. Narrative often teaches more indirectly than didactic literature, but that makes it no less normative, once we correctly discern the text’s original intent.69 At the very least, then, the reader must guard against seeing Acts 2 1: 17-26 as too positive a model inasmuch as the whole plot backfires (w. 27-36).But this does not hold true for Luke’s descriptions of early Christian “com- munism.” Though some argue (usually staunch capitalists!) that the experiments in communal sharing of 24445 and 4:32-37 were misguided failures, Luke appears instead to present them as positive models. The results he describes are worded as follows: “And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved”
(2:47) and “much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among themn (4:33b-34a).70
If it is wrong to exaggerate the transitional nature of Acts, it is equally mis- guided to identifjr turning points within the book &er which the message of salva- tion is no longer offered to Jews. Of course, on several occasions Paul turns fi-om Jews to Gentiles because of the repeated rejection and hostility he receives from the Jewish people (13:4648; 18:5-7; 19:8-10; 28:23-28). But the very fact that he repeats this pattern several times, as he moves from city to city, prevents us from alleging that any given episode indicates a more general strategy of abandoning the Jews in favor of an exclusively Gentile mission. Even the final turning fi-om Jews to Gentiles in Rome, with which Acts ends (28:23-38), does not justif+ any conclu- sions about appropriate evangelistic strategy elsewhere. After all, in his farewell speech to the Ephesian elders-which he presents as a model for the ministry of subsequent Christian leaders (20: 18-35 )-Paul emphasizes proclamation “to both Jews and Greeks” (v. 21). And 19:10,17-18 make clear that even after Paul shifted preaching venues in Ephesus, Jews continued to hear the gospel and to believe.71 These observations thus rule out all of the older, more extreme forms of dispensationalism that viewed as normative for Gentile Christians only those parts of the NT that occurred tier one of the alleged turning points in Acts.
Acts as Narrative
We have already stated that narrative often teaches more indirectly than di- dactic literature without becoming any less normative. Thus, we reject Fee and
@On the whole theme of “The Law in Luke-Acts,” see the article so-titled by C. L. Blomberg in Jslyr22 (1984): 53-80.
@See esp. L. Ryken, 7%e Literature of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 45-106.
“On this theme, cf. esp. R. J. Cassidy, Society and Politics in the Acts of the Apostles (Maryknoll:
Orbis, 1987).
“Cf. esp. R. C. Tannehill, “Rejection by Jews and Turning to Gentiles: The Pattern of Paul’s Mission in Acts,” in Luke-Acts and the Jewish People: Eight Critical Perspectives, ed. J. B. Tyson (Minne-
apolis: Augsburg, 1988). 83-101. *
350 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation
Stuart’s highlighted maxim that “unless Scripture explicitly tells us we must do some- thing, what is merely narrated or described can never function in a normative way.“72 Though they do not intend it as such, this restriction implicitly contradicts 2 Tim 3: 16 and fails to grasp the key purposes of narrative literature. We have already illustrated in some detail how parables, for example, otien contrast characters whose behavior is meant to be imitated or avoided. Sometimes a parable’s context makes that point clear (e.g., Lk 10:37; 18:l; 13:3-5). This suggests that in other cases we should draw similar conclusions. Nevertheless, one must proceed much more cautiously when di- rect commands are absent. How then should we proceed to interpret Acts? Primarily, we need to study the entire book to determine if specific events form a consistent pattern throughout or if the positive models Luke presents vary from one situation to another. The former will suggest that Luke was emphasizing a normative, consistent principle; the latter, that applications may change fkom one time and place to the next.
Examples abound. Gamaliel’s advice to the Sanhedrin concerning the Twelve (“Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is fi-om God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.“) generously granted the disciples their f?eedom (Acts 5 : 38-39). But when Paul encountered “magical” religion in Ephesus (comparable to what we would call the “occult”), he employed a different logic:
strongly exhorting people to abandon such practices and to burn the scrolls con- taining incantations (19:17-20). Today, Islam is the largest and most powerful non- Christian religion in the world. Historically, Christians have largely ignored it, but in 1500 years it has hardly gone away. So while God in his sovereignty graciously used Gamaliel’s “logic” to help the disciples, we dare not imitate it in every instance.
Models of church government and organization in Acts disclose an even more bewildering variety of forms. Congregationalists, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians all legitimately point to passages in Acts to support their views of church structure and leadership. In 6: 1-6 the entire congregation chooses the apostles’ helpers. In 13: l- 3 a select group of church leaders chooses Barnabas and Saul for their missionary mir- istry. And in Acts 20:17-38 Paul resembles a “bishop” who convenes all the Ephesian
“elders” for instruction. Each of these models in turn draws on various Jewish or Greco-Roman precedents. Luke views all of these models as appropriate applica- tions of leadership principles under various circumstances in various cultures.73 To apply them today, one needs to look for analogous circumstances in our cultures. It is probably not mere coincidence that a decision affecting everyone in a local con- gregation was discussed by all, that one limited to the personal ministries of church leaders was dealt with by that smaller group, and that general instruction for people in several congregations came from one who had authority over all of them.
On the other hand, sometimes patterns of ministry and mission remain con- stant throughout Acts. A good example is Luke’s understanding of the filling of the Holy Spirit. Every time believers are filled with the Spirit-and this happens
72Fee and Stuart, How to Read, 97.
73E.g., the Greek ekkhia (“assembly” of citizens), the Jewish synagogue elders, and the Roman territorial magistrates.
Genres of the New Testament 351
repeatedly to the same person or group (2:4; 5:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9)-they are en- abled to proclaim the Word of God boldly or to do mighty works in Jesus’ name. In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul describes different results of the Spirit’s filling: prais- ing and thanking God and submitting to other believers (Eph 5:18-21). But these descriptions are complementary rather than contradictory. A proper doctrine of Scripture will not allow Acts to be subordinated to Paul simply because the one is narrative and the other didactic literature. Neither will it permit Paul to be subordi- nated to Acts because of an inherent preference by some for the phenomena of Acts (such as speaking in tongues).74
Probably the most important examples of consistent patterns within Acts relate to Luke’s main theme-the expansion of the Gospel fkom Jewish to Gentile territory.
Amid the great diversity of sermons that Peter and Paul preach throughout the pages of Acts, we can discern a common kerygma. The first Christians consistently focus on the death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus as the core of their proclamation. Be- cause of who Jesus was and what he did, all people must now repent in order to receive forgiveness of sins. To be sure, this message can be found elsewhere in the NT but, even if it were not, its consistent appearance in Acts would make it normative.75
Even the diversity within the sermons in which this kerygma appears points to another consistent feature of early Christian preaching: concern for contextualization of the gospel. When preaching to Jews, Peter and Paul appeal to the fulfillment of Scripture (2:14-39; 3:12-26; 13:1&U). When addressing the Stoics and Epicure- ans, Paul explains to them their “unknown god” (17:22-31). When he speaks to the superstitious believers in mythology in Lystra, Paul appeals to the testimony of the creator as found in rain and harvest (14:14-18). In each case these preachers sought to establish common ground with their audiences in order to gain the great- est possible acceptance of their message. In each case, too, they made sure to in- clude a distinctive witness to the true and living God, usually explicitly in terms of the person and work of Christ. Christians in all ages can learn much about cross- cultural ministry fi-om these models and would do well to emulate them.76
74Generally well-balanced in this respect is R. Stronstad, ‘Ihe Charismatic Tho~ogy of St. Luke (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1984).
‘The classic study of the core kerygma is C. H. Dodd, i%e Apostolic Preaching and Its LIevelop- ments (New York: Harper and Row, 1951). Cf. the discussion in G. E. Ladd, A Yhology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 19741, 3284%
76A particularly helpful study of the patterns of ministry and preaching throughout Acts is M.
Green, Evangelism in the EatJy Church (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1970). The speeches of Acts have generated extensive scholarly debate with regard to their historic&y. The ancient Greek historian, Thucydides, has been uncritically cited as Luke’s exemplar to prove both substantial trustworthiness and substantial fabrication! It is not clear that there is one Thucydidean view of reporting speeches. He apparently followed memory and eyewitness sources carefully at times and on other occasions made up speeches while striving for historical verisimilitude. See S. E. Porter, “Thucydides 1.22.1 and Speeches in Acts: Is There a Thucydidean View?” NovT 32 (1990): 121-42. On the speeches of Acts the most thorough and balanced study is now C. H. Gempf, “Historical and Literary Appropriateness in the Mission Speeches of Paul in Acts” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Aberdeen, 1988). But for those who believe in the authority of the final form of Scripture, irrespective of its prehistory or tradition criticism,
few hermeneutical issues hinge on the solution to this debate. *
352 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation