And You Shall Be My Witnesses: A Verse-By-Verse Study of the Acts of the Apostles for Individuals and Small Groups

By Robert Kelvin Gee

Confusion, false doctrine, and sheer foolishness continue to overwhelm the evangelical church— especially in the United States of America and in Europe.

It is important that Christians and local churches get back to basics, which means discovering how to live as followers of Christ and spread the Word.

Robert Kelvin Gee suggests that the best way to do this is to study how they did church at the very beginning. The Acts of the Apostles shows us this so clearly.

This book will take you verse-by-verse through the first twelve chapters of Acts, using a question-and-answer format to reveal how the church was born, how it grew, and how believers can ensure it stays on track. Get answers to questions such as:

• Why were the disciples commanded to stay in Jerusalem?

• What is the purpose of the Holy Spirit’s baptism?

• Did Jesus ascend from the Mount of Olives or from Bethany? And were there angels present or not?

Learn about the early church, ignite your faith, and spread the Word with the lessons and insights in this book.

• Language: English
• Publisher: WestBow Press
• Release date: Aug 8, 2022
• ISBN: 9781664270152

Robert Kelvin Gee

Robert Kelvin Gee is one of the leading experts in the field of personal leaderhsip in the United Kingdom. He has coached and lectured on values-based leadership to businesses and other organizations throughout the world. He earned his bachelor’s degree in biblical studies from Northeastern Bible College and has post-graduate qualifications in psychology and education. He was a director of Youth for Christ in South Africa for some 10 years. He is at time of writing a preaching elder at Staines Congregational Church in the UK.

Book preview

Copyright © 2022 Robert Kelvin Gee.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

This book is a work of non-fiction. Unless otherwise noted, the author and the publisher make no explicit guarantees as to the accuracy of the information contained in this book and in some cases, names of people and places have been altered to protect their privacy.

WestBow Press

A Division of Thomas Nelson & Zondervan

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.westbowpress.com

844-714-3454

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are taken from the Holman Christian Standard Bible®, Copyright © 2004 by Holman Bible Publishers. Used by permission. Holman Christian Standard Bible® and HCSB® are federally registered trademarks of Holman Bible Publishers.

Scripture quotations marked (NASB) taken from the (NASB®) New American Standard Bible®, Copyright © 1960, 1971, 1977, 1995, 2020 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. All rights reserved. www.lockman.org

Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996, 2004, 2015 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.

Scripture marked (KJV) taken from the King James Version of the Bible.

Scripture quotations designated (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible: New International Version®. NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-1-6642-7016-9 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6642-7017-6 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-6642-7015-2 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2022911556

WestBow Press rev. date: 8/4/2022

CONTENTS

Introduction

Background Information

An Outline of the Book of Acts

Chapter 1 The Prologue

Chapter 2 Waiting for the Holy Spirit, Part 1

Chapter 3 Waiting for the Holy Spirit, Part 2

Chapter 4 Waiting for the Holy Spirit, Part 3

Chapter 5 The Waiting Is Over!

Chapter 6 Initial Reactions to the Spirit’s Outpouring

Chapter 7 Peter’s First Sermon, Part 1

Chapter 8 Peter’s First Sermon, Part 2

Chapter 9 Our First Look at the New Church

Chapter 10 The Healing of the Lame Man

Chapter 11 Peter’s Second Sermon

Chapter 12 The First Signs of Opposition

Chapter 13 The New Church Shaken into Action

Chapter 14 What Happens When You Lie to the Holy Spirit

Chapter 15 Apostolic Wonders and the High Priest’s Response

Chapter 16 The Trial and the Victory

Chapter 17 More Help and Coming Martyrdom

Chapter 18 Stephen’s Defence of the Gospel, Part 1

Chapter 19 Stephen’s Defence of the Gospel, Part 2

Chapter 20 The Missions of Saul and Philip

Chapter 21 The Sorry Story of Simon the Sorcerer

Chapter 22 Philip and the Ethiopian Treasurer

Chapter 23 The Conversion of Saul of Tarsus

Chapter 24 Saul Meets Ananias

Chapter 25 Saul Begins His Ministry

Chapter 26 Peter Is Back!

Chapter 27 Two Remarkable Visions

Chapter 28 Peter and Cornelius Meet

Chapter 29 Peter’s Sermon in Cornelius’s Home and Its Results

Chapter 30 Peter’s Report to the Church in Jerusalem

Chapter 31 Introducing the Antioch Church

Chapter 32 The Persecution Heightens

Chapter 33 Peter’s Miraculous Escape

Chapter 34 The Death of King Herod

In Summary: Book 1 (Acts 1–12)

Bibliography

To my wife, Denise,

the most caring, forgiving, and dedicated

life partner I could ever have hoped for.

INTRODUCTION

Can there be a better way for us in the twenty-first century to discover how to do church more biblically and, therefore, more effectively than to have one of the most reliable historians of the first century AD describe to us how people did it back then? Dr Luke has provided us just that. He has given us an often first-hand account of the triumphs and travails of the first thirty-five years of church history in fine detail and with compassionate understanding.

For those of us in Christian leadership or those wanting simply to undertake a deeper study of what theologians call ecclesiology (the doctrine of the church), there do exist indeed vast libraries of commentaries and other books and resources on the subject. But I believe it is critical in these very confusing and dangerous days for the church, in so many places, that we go back again and again to the real source of what we know about the very beginnings of Christianity, and that we do so with expectant hearts and curious minds. So it is we return to what some call The Acts of the Holy Spirit, and we say Thank you, Dr Luke, for he has given us a remarkable record of the subject. What we have in the two-part writing project by Luke (the third Gospel and the book of Acts) is an authoritative and reliable account of the birth pangs of the church.

69762.png

Using This Book

The book before you has been designed for either personal, individual, or small group study, and it can be followed at the pace best suited to your circumstances. Each chapter is a self-contained study unit that could take anywhere from forty-five minutes to an hour or more navigate, depending on the depth of discussion or exploration devoted to it.

My suggestion is that a week before the meeting, you send to your study group the passage to be studied and the questions that are in boldface. As the study leader, you have been given fairly extensive notes to enable you to answer these and most other questions. Of course, I am not for a moment suggesting that you not use other resources in addition to this book, but I sincerely hope I have provided you with a comprehensive set of answers to the most likely questions.

69765.png

On a more personal note, when I am reading a Christian book of any type, it is my preference to know the theological world view and perspectives of the author. So, in case you are anything like me in this regard, let me tell you from the beginning where I stand on such matters. I am a born-again, Bible-believing, evangelical, Reformed Christian, if that helps. On the question of the Bible itself, I believe the Scriptures to be verbally inspired, infallible, inerrant, authoritative, and sufficient for all Christian faith and practice. Personally, I cannot fathom why anyone would tackle a project such as this, where the text is studied word for word, verse by verse, if one did not have a high view of the divine revelation. Furthermore, I believe that a Christian is one who is born again by the gracious work of Christ on the Cross and is absolutely reliant upon God’s Holy Spirit to speak to him or her from the pages of the Bible, to illumine the heart and bring clarity to the mind.

It is time then for us to open our Bibles and to begin our study of the Acts of the Apostles. But before we do so, I strongly suggest that you read the whole book through at least once. Get a view of the big picture before you begin to immerse yourself in the detail. And the big picture is a wonderful picture, a climactic story of what is to many the most important thirty to forty years of all of human history. From the Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ in approximately AD 30, until the death of Paul the apostle somewhere between AD 67 and 70, we have the story of all stories. So let us enjoy it together.

And one more thing: before you commence any unit of study, please do not forget to come to God in prayer and ask Him to reveal Himself to you in the text. Without the work of the Holy Spirit in opening up the verses of Scripture to us, we may well find the study dry and unprofitable. With expectant prayer, we can count on God to guide us into all truth, just as Jesus promised in some of His final words to His disciples: If I go, I will send Him [the Holy Spirit] to you. When He comes, He will convict the world about sin, righteousness and judgement. … When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth (John 16:7–8, 13.)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Just Who Is Dr Luke?

Now, of course, there will be those who suggest that there is no certainty at all about the authorship of Luke–Acts, amongst them F. C. Bauer of the Tubingen school in the middle of the nineteenth century and others such as Alfred Harnack, who while he does admit that Acts is a historical work of some merit, he nonetheless accuses the writer (not Luke) of great instances of carelessness, and often complete confusion in the narrative.¹ Amongst some modern scholars, N. T. Wright suggests, Internal evidence for Luke’s authorship meshes with the tradition, but it is far from decisive.²

However, it is true to say that today the majority of serious evangelical scholars in the field of biblical history are almost unanimous that it is indeed Luke who is the author of the works before us and indeed one of the first century’s most capable historians. I could cite and refer to many of them, but let me just mention names such as Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and more recently, Stott, Swindoll, MacArthur, Lloyd-Jones, and Geisler, to give you an idea of the type of commentators who see no problem at all with the authorship of Luke.

Dr Ajith Fernando in The NIV Application Commentary concludes as follows: The external evidence available for the authorship of Acts, gleaned from the writings of the church in the first few centuries, is unanimous that the author was Luke. When we look for internal evidence, we note that Acts is linked closely with the third Gospel, which indicates common authorship. Both are addressed to the same person, Theophilus.³

From the pages of the Bible, we do have some insights into just who this first-century author might be. There are three specific references to him in the letters of Paul, as well as three parts of Acts itself where the author switches from the third person they/them to the first person we/us, indicating that the author himself is taking part in the narrative.

Paul Mentioning Luke

Luke is mentioned by Paul as one of his close followers and helpers in his second letter to Timothy, "Only Luke is with me (4:11, emphasis added), and also in his letter to Philemon: Epaphrus, my fellow prisoner in Christ greets you, and so do Mark, Arsitarchus, Demas, and Luke, my co-workers (vv. 23–24). But the best-known reference Paul makes to Luke is in Colossians 4:14, where Paul is most likely writing from house arrest in Rome: Luke, the beloved physician, and Demetrius greet you" (emphasis added).

So here we have our introduction to Luke as a medical man and as a co-traveller (and, presumably, co-evangelist) of the apostle Paul. His being a physician gives us a clue as to the way he approaches his task as a recorder of history—he speaks as a man of science, a researcher, a man eager to get his facts straight and to give an accurate version of what he hears and sees. This is also apparent from his introductory statements to the two parts of his history of Jesus and the early church:

• "Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed down to them. It also seemed good to me, since I have carefully investigated everything from the very first, to write to you in orderly sequence, most honourable Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed" (Luke 1:1–4, emphasis added).

• "I wrote the first narrative, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach" (Acts 1:1, emphasis added).

Can you get a sense of the careful researcher from the italicised sections?

In his Systematic Theology, Norman Geisler gives eighty-four clear examples of specific local knowledge from the book of Acts that prove that Luke is indeed deserving of the accolade of being a very efficient historian and who gives us a very accurate description of the church and the world at the time. I will just select a few:

• the proper location of Lycaonia (14:6)

• the correct language spoken in Lystra (14:11)

• the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)

• the proper title used of the magistrates—politarchs (17:6)

• the correct designation of Gallio as proconsul and resident in Corinth (18:12)

• the well-known shrines and images of Artemis (19:27).⁴

Luke Becomes Part of the Story

We also get to know Luke a little better because he joins the narrative himself in three specific portions of the book, and from these passages we can see a man prepared to go through all the hardship and suffering that Paul himself has had to endure. The passages are as follows:

• Acts 16:10–17

Here we see Luke join Paul on his second missionary journey and especially supporting him in his imprisonment in Philippi in Greece.

• Acts 20:5–21:18

We are now on the third and final missionary expedition, and we see Luke with Paul completing the journey in Asia Minor (modern south-western Turkey) and then joining him on his return to Jerusalem.

• Acts 27:1–28:16

In this climactic conclusion to the narrative, Luke is part of Paul’s travelling party as Paul is under arrest and on his way to trial and captivity in Rome.

As we come to these passages in our study, we will see what more we can learn about our author.

We can discover more about the person of Luke from the way in which he writes and especially by what he deliberately decides to include and what he presumably omits. One thing we do learn is that Luke is an apologist. Now an apologist is one who has the special gift and task of speaking up in defence of the faith and the gospel. You might say that surely God and His Word don’t need to be defended, but consider what Peter writes in his first letter: "Set apart the Messiah as Lord in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defence [Greek: apologia] to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15).

The Gospel writers (including Luke), as well as the other New Testament letter writers (Paul, Peter, John, James, Jude, and the writer of Hebrews), are all great apologists. And this apologetic activity continues throughout the first centuries of the church, largely because the church and its doctrines and practices were constantly under attack. Some may say that nothing has changed. Over the past one hundred years or so, God has blessed us with many terrific apologists, evangelists, and theologians who can help us prepare our own answers to the tough questions we are asked about our faith by the modern sceptic. Amongst my favourites are C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, and Francis Schaeffer, along with current experts such as John Lennox, Albert Mohler, Alistair McGrath, William Lane Craig, Os Guinness, Tim Keller, and Stephen Meyer.

In his work as an apologist, Luke makes sure that he gives us the record of many sermons and talks that do just this—give a firm defence of the new faith—from Peter’s first sermon at Pentecost (2:14–42) to, soon after, Stephen’s wonderful, gripping last words to his own killers (7:1–53). We are given a number of Paul’s hugely effective apologetic messages, especially his sermon in Athens to the philosophers of the day (17:22–31).

But it is as a historian that we best know Luke, from his Gospel and from the book before us. In the middle of the last century, we were given the testimony of Professor A. N. Sherwin-White, who was the reader in ancient history at Oxford University. He strongly affirms the qualities and achievements of Luke as a historian when he writes of the book of Acts:

The historical framework is exact. In terms of time and place the details are precise and correct. One walks the streets and marketplace, the theatres and assemblies of first century Ephesus or Thessalonica, Corinth or Philippi, with the author of Acts. The great men of the cities, the magistrates, the mob, and the mob leaders are all there. … It is similar with the narrative of Paul’s judicial experiences before the tribunals of Gallio, Felix, and Festus. As documents these narratives belong to the same historical series as the record of provincial and imperial trials in epigraphical and literary sources of the first and early second centuries. … For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. … Any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted.⁵

When Was Acts Written?

Opinions still vary on exactly when Luke wrote this tremendous book, anywhere from AD 64 to around AD 120. I am not intending here to go into the whole argument about the exact date of writing, but I am going to throw in my lot with those who suggest an earlier date, largely because of two events that Luke does not mention at all. And seeing as he was a complete historian, I am sure that he would have included these if he were still in the act of writing. Luke does not mention the Roman destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70, nor does he mention the death of Paul in Rome in around AD 64–66. So I am going to suggest the date of the writing of this book to be no later than AD 66–67, maybe even a few years earlier.

69784.png

Luke and the Old Testament

Professor I. Howard Marshall is the contributor for the book of Acts in the massive volume Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament edited by D. A. Carson and G. K. Beale (Baker Academic, 2007). He gives us a thorough account of every allusion to the Old Testament made throughout the entire book of Acts, a most useful resource. He comments in his introduction are as follows:

We are fortunate that Luke has given us some insight into his approach. Two significant passages occur at the end of his Gospel. Jesus Himself is represented assaying to the travellers to Emmaus.

How foolish you are and how slow of heart to believe everything the prophets have said! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter His glory? (Luke 24:25–26)

Luke then relates,

Beginning from Moses and all the prophets, He explained to them the things in all the Scriptures concerning Himself. (Luke 24:27)

In the second passage we are told that Jesus opened their minds so that they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, Thus it is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance leading to the forgiveness of sins will be preached in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things (Luke 24:45–48).

The effect of these two passages is to show that for Luke, the events in question were pre-described in Scripture and therefore necessarily had to take place, and that these events included not only the suffering and glorification of Jesus, but also the preaching to all nations.

69790.png

Why Does Luke Write This Sequel to His Gospel?

The commentators have much to say about the themes and purposes of the book of Acts:

• While Luke–Acts has several utilities, didactic, polemical, and evangelistic, it is principally an apologetic work. … Acts presents Paul as a divinely chosen agent, a faithful herald of Jesus Christ, warmly received by Jewish Christian leaders like James, slandered and menaced by Jews and treated unfairly by Roman officials.⁶

• The principal agent … in directing all the labours of the apostles was the Holy Spirit, and it is undoubtedly … a purpose of the author to show how this divine power was exercised in compliance with the oft-repeated promise of the Lord.⁷

• [Acts] is a book of transitions, documenting the period after the earthly ministry of Jesus, when the church began receiving the written treasures of the apostles. … It narrates an era like no other in history, a time when God had much to say, but spoke less through individual prophets and more through a growing Spirit-filled community.⁸

• Fernando lists what he sees as a number of themes and key points in Acts:

o the priority of evangelism

o the power of the Holy Spirit

o Christian community life

o breaking human barriers in Christ

o the place of suffering

o the sovereignty of God

o reactions to the gospel

o the legal status of Christianity.⁹

• The purpose of Acts cannot be considered in isolation from the purpose of Luke’s gospel … [but must be considered] with one coherent purpose. It is stated in the prologue to the gospel ‘that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed’ (Luke 1:4).¹⁰

My summary of the reasons for Luke being the one who wrote this second volume of early Christian history are derived from my own reading of the book and from these and many other commentators’ views.

Luke wrote the book of Acts:

• to provide us with a clear and concise history of the first generation of the Christian church,

• to offer a defence for the doctrines and practices of this church,

• and to give us an evangelistic tract that clearly explains the truth of the New Covenant (the gospel) to both Jew and Gentile.

AN OUTLINE OF THE BOOK OF ACTS

According to Luke, Jesus’s final words to His disciples are these: "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be My witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8, emphasis added).

These words offer us an excellent outline to the twenty-eight chapters before us as we see Peter, Paul, Stephen, Philip, and the others indeed sharing the gospel:

• first, in Jerusalem,

• then in all Judea and Samaria,

• and finally to the ends of the earth.

In this final section we also find the well-known missionary journeys of the apostle Paul, undertaken sometime after his conversion on the Damascus road, which is recorded in Acts 9:1–9.

The final eight chapters trace the final record that we have in Acts of Paul’s ministry, his trials, and his eventual imprisonment in Rome.

Endnotes for Introduction and Background Information

1 Harnack, 146.

2 Wright, 608.

3 Fernando, 21.

4 Geisler, 351–2.

5 Sherwin-White, 186.

6 Wright, 616.

7 McGarvey, xxi.

8 Swindoll, 8–9.

9 Fernando, 30–1.

10 Bruce, 6–7.

CHAPTER 1

76939.png

The Prologue

(ACTS 1:1–3)

I wrote the first narrative, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, until that day He was taken up, after He had given orders through the Holy Spirit, to the apostles who He had chosen. After He had suffered, He also presented Himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God (Acts 1:1–3).

The first narrative—translated as first account (NASB)—clearly refers to the Gospel according to Luke. Many suggest that the prologue to the Gospel could also in fact serve as a prologue to both parts of Luke’s writings.

Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed down to them. It also seemed good to me, since I have carefully investigated everything from the very first, to write to you in orderly sequence, most honourable Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed. (Luke 1:1–4)

Q. What do you think of these prologues and their purpose?

Many scholars think of Luke–Acts as a single document in two parts. In fact, there is some evidence from the early church that these two narratives were circulated and read together. I like to think that what Luke intended to do was to write a single overarching narrative of the beginnings of Christianity from the Incarnation of Christ through to the end of Paul’s ministry. However, when he got to the end of Chapter 24 of his Gospel, he was so excited that he rushed it off to Theophilus, and then got on with writing the next chapters of the story, the Acts of the Apostles. What Wright says at this point is useful: "The two-volume work has enormous significance in the New Testament and within early Christianity as a whole. … It is the largest sub-corpus of the New Testament. Luke–Acts makes up a massive 28% of the New Testament. Paul’s letters comprise only 24%, and the Johannine corpus covers a mere 20%."¹

Q. Who is Theophilus?

For those who would suggest that this book (as well as Luke’s Gospel) was indeed written at least one hundred and fifty years or so after the events described, the name of Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, is mentioned; he was bishop there from AD 169 to AD 182. But few serious scholars hold to this position.

So just who is this person to whom Luke sends these narratives? Is he indeed an actual living person? Those scholars who suggest that Theophilus may not be an actual person known to Luke make this suggestion because the meaning of the name Theophilus is dear to God or loved by God. So they suggest that Luke may just be writing to his Christian readers in general, calling them those who are loved by God. But there is no reason to suggest that Theophilus could not have been an actual individual known personally to Luke. If he were addressing a whole congregation of people, why would he address them as most honourable Theophilus, as he does in the prologue to his Gospel? This seems highly peculiar otherwise. Most scholars suggest that Theophilus is a prominent Gentile Christian who is acting as some kind of patron to Luke in this literary endeavour that Luke has undertaken. Or, of course, he could be just a really good friend.

Q. What is Luke’s purpose in these prologues?

If we accept that both the Luke prologue and the one here in Acts can be seen as introductory comments by the author to set up certain parameters and purposes for the narrative, then we have to ask, what is Luke’s specific purpose?

Firstly, as we have hinted earlier, Luke is determined to present an accurate history based on solid research and eyewitness testimony. As a man of science, he is concerned about truth. We can see this from phrases such as the following:

• original eyewitnesses

• carefully investigated everything

• know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed

• many convincing proofs.

Secondly, F. F. Bruce draws our attention to the implication of Luke’s words in the Acts prologue, namely that this second account will be "an account of what Jesus continued to do and teach after His Ascension—no longer in visible presence upon the earth but by His Spirit in His followers".² We see Luke beginning this second part of the narrative by repeating and adding more detail to the account of the Ascension that forms the end part of his Gospel, emphasising the unbroken continuity of the ministry of Jesus.

Thirdly, Luke emphasises several key events that will make a huge impact on the early days of the church as the apostles and the other followers of Jesus remember what has happened in their lives over the past year or so. Speaking of Jesus, Luke reminds us that:

• He did and taught.

• He suffered.

• He presented Himself alive to them.

• He had given orders … to the apostles who He had chosen.

• He was taken up.

Luke is ensuring that Theophilus, and the myriad others who will read this account, is in no doubt that this is still all about Jesus and His ministry in and through His Spirit, and then in and through His chosen people.

Let’s say a few things regarding the five key points about Jesus made by Luke in his prologue:

1. Jesus did and taught—He performed many miraculous works and taught us how to live for God in His kingdom.

There is a fairly new phenomenon of a section of the evangelical church calling themselves Red Letter Believers. This means that they own Bibles in which the actual words of Jesus are printed in red, and this is the only part of the Scriptures they pay any real attention to. This is foolish, especially as we don’t even know for sure—especially in, say, John’s Gospel—where Jesus Himself stops speaking and John, the writer, adds his own comments. But more alarming is the way in which most of the Bible is simply ignored or at least made to appear less important.

Of course, the words of Jesus are critically important, and we should read them often and meditate continually on His teachings and works. In fact, I would suggest you read one of the four Gospels every quarter over and above your regular Bible reading and study—January to March, read Matthew; April to June, read Mark; July to September, read Luke; and October to December, read John. You will never get tired of the life of Jesus, and you will learn something new every time. But do not neglect the rest of the Bible—both the Old and New Testaments. The whole Bible is God’s revelation to us, and we need to spend as much time as possible in His Word.

2. Jesus suffered—He was beaten close to death and then experienced the most painful death imaginable.

As we read the four Gospels, especially the final few chapters of each Gospel, we cannot help but be deeply moved, astonished, and grieved by the extreme bloodthirsty actions of Jesus’s accusers and executioners. The sheer illegality of the arrest and trials of Jesus are bad enough, but the physical abuse, which itself should not have been allowed at all when a man was being tried, was sadistic and inhumane, from the beating and flogging to the jamming of a crown of thorns upon His head—and all this over and above the psychological and emotional abuse.

And finally we witness the absolute horror of crucifixion, so vividly portrayed by the four Gospel writers and by commentator Jim Bishop as he describes Christ’s suffering on the cross:

His arms were [now] in a V position, and Jesus became conscious of two unendurable consequences: the first was that the pain in his wrists was beyond bearing, and that the muscle cramps knotted his forearms and upper arms and the pads of his shoulders; the second was that his pectoral muscles at the sides of his chest were momentarily paralysed. This induced in him an involuntary panic; for he found that while he could draw air into his lungs, he was powerless to exhale.

At one, Jesus raised himself off his bleeding feet. As the weight of his body came down on the insteps, the single nail pressed hard against the top of the wound. Slowly, steadily, Jesus was forced to raise himself higher and higher until, for the moment, his head hid the sign that told of his crime. When his shoulders were on a level with his hands, breathing was rapid and easier. Like the other two [crucified alongside him] he fought the pain in his feet in order to breathe rapidly for a few moments. Then, unable to bear the pain below, which cramped legs and thighs and wrung moans from the strongest, he let his torso sag lower and lower, and his knees projected a little at a time until, with a deep sigh, he felt himself to be hanging by his wrists. And this process must have been repeated again and again.³

I share this gory detail not to shock but to help us realise that this was a real death, an awful death, with real pain and real blood being shed. And He was innocent! And He could have called legions of angels to come to His rescue at any time. But as the songwriter Graham Kendrick so aptly puts it: Held to the cross not by nails, but by love; ’twas you pierced His heart, not the spear.

Promise: If one is permitted to have favourite promise verses from the Bible, here are some of mine: For while we were still helpless, at the appointed moment, Christ died for the ungodly. For rarely will someone die for a just person—though for a good person perhaps someone might even dare to die. But God proves His own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ dies for us (Romans 5:6–8).

3. Jesus presented Himself alive to the people. He rose bodily from the grave and appeared to as many as five hundred people over just more than a month.

The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the foundation upon which our faith is built, and if it should ever be proved that Jesus is not risen, then we have to agree with Paul, when writing to the Christians in Corinth, he says, Now if Christ is preached as raised from the dead, how can some of you say, ‘There is no resurrection of the dead’? But if there is no resurrection from the dead, then Christ has not been raised, and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is without foundation, and so is your faith. … If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins (1 Corinthians 15:12–17).

Every Christian must believe that the Saviour died, really died, and then became alive, that He really, bodily rose from the dead. Do you really, unquestioningly, believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus? If you don’t, you can never fully understand what it means to be a Christian in the first place. I personally believe that the Resurrection of Jesus in around the year AD 30 is one of the most attestable facts of all ancient history. It really did happen, and the evidence is clear and undeniable. If this remains an area of doubt for you, I strongly suggest that you read one of the many excellent books that have been written on the subject. There are literally hundreds.

Encouragement: Of all the great religions in the world, ours is the only one to have anything like the Resurrection as a part of its foundation. For every other religion, you may be able to visit the tomb of the founder, and if you do, you can be certain there is a body in that grave. Not so with Christianity!

4. Jesus gave orders to apostles He had chosen. He selected a group of faithful men to establish His church and take the gospel to the ancient world.

One of the worrying aspects of modern Christianity is that in the more extreme charismatic Word of Faith and health and prosperity gospel churches, religious leaders are calling themselves apostles, a title that the book of Acts clearly shows to be a very distinct title given to a very specific group of men. And more than this, in the final book of the Bible, in Revelation 21:14, we read of the description of the New Jerusalem: The city wall had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the Lamb’s apostles. The only thing we are not sure of is whether the twelfth name is that of Paul or Matthias. But there were then and always will be only twelve apostles, and those who would call themselves apostles today are mistaken at best, charlatans at worst. We will see later how the office of apostle was determined.

Warning: In the New Testament, in the teachings of Jesus Himself, as well as those of Paul, Peter, John and Jude, we learn that the church through all the ages, and especially in the last days, will be tempted towards heresy and wrong doctrine by men and women parading as teachers of the truth and apostles of the gospel. But they are anything but trustworthy.

Let’s look at the warnings of Jude, a half-brother of our Lord, and the least quoted in this regard, as he describes these false teachers: These are the ones who are like dangerous reefs at your love feasts. They feast with you, nurturing only themselves without fear. They are like waterless clouds carried along by the wind; trees in late autumn—fruitless, twice dead, pulled out by the roots; wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shameful deeds; wandering stars for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. … These people are discontented grumblers, walking according to their decrees, their mouths uttering arrogant words, flattering people for their own advantage (Jude 12:13, 16).

Be constantly aware of such pretenders—they often give themselves away by calling themselves apostles and then claiming to perform the miracles, signs, and wonders the first, true apostles did. Ask God to guide you through His Word. Put every teaching to the test of Scripture.

5. Jesus was taken up. He ascended to His Father, where He received His reward and continues to minister to His people.

We will talk about the Ascension in the next chapter, but let us just at this stage think about two promises that these apostles would be very mindful of, promises that could not be fulfilled until and unless Jesus were to leave them physically. So while they are terribly saddened by seeing Him leave them as He ascends to the Father, they do remember these promises from Jesus’s final instructions to them in the upper room before His arrest. And I am sure He must have repeated these promises during the forty days of His post-Resurrection teaching:

Endnotes for Chapter 1

1 Wright, 608.

2 Bruce, 30.

3 Bishop, 491–2.

CHAPTER 2

76939.png

Waiting for the Holy Spirit, Part 1

(ACTS 1:4–8)

While He was together with them, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for the Father’s promise. This, He said, is what you heard from Me; for John baptised with water, but you will be baptised with the Holy Spirit not many days from now. So when they had come together, they asked Him, Lord, at this time are You restoring the Kingdom to Israel? He said to them, It is not for you to know times or periods that the Father has set by His own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

We now embark on the study of a brief conversation that Jesus has with His disciples, probably the Twelve, with others listening in. While He was together with them reminds us that Jesus and His followers are now at the very end of a forty-day period of teaching and fellowship. Can you imagine what it must have been like to be there, sitting at the feet of the Master and hearing Him tell you what you needed to know to live the Christian life once He goes to the Father? From this short paragraph we can see clearly that even after all this intense teaching, most of the disciples still show basic ignorance of what Jesus has been saying about the subject of the kingdom.

1. The Promise of the Spirit

While He was together with them, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for the Father’s promise. This, He said, is what you heard from Me; for John baptised with water, but you will be baptised with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

Q. Why were the disciples commanded to stay in Jerusalem?

It is important to see here that this phrasing emphasises the bodily resurrection of Jesus. This was not a ghost or a phantom amongst them, but the same real, tangible, audible Jesus. In His resurrection body, He is completely recognisable and is able to do all of what He did before His death (such as talk and eat), but much more (move into a room without using the door!). It is clear that in His new resurrection body He would not need to eat with them for His own nourishment, but He seems to do this to share fellowship with them for their benefit. It may even be a reference to sharing a Communion (Eucharist) meal with them as Luke seems to suggest in his Gospel (Luke 24:30): It was as He reclined at the table with them that He took the bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them.

The fact that this group of followers is physically experiencing Jesus with them becomes one of the essential criteria for the office of apostleship. But more about this later. Jesus is clear that He wants them to stay where they are, and He wants them all together in one place so that when the incredible miracle of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurs, it will find them together and waiting expectantly for something most unusual to happen, although they did not fully comprehend just what was about to happen. But why Jerusalem, and not back up in Galilee where they had spent so much time together? The obvious first reason is that they needed to be in Jerusalem for the coming Feast of Pentecost anyway, for which they were expected to be there. But where other than Jerusalem was God likely to initiate and establish the next great moment in His redemption history, the founding of His church? All of the great moments in the story of God’s working with His people seem to happen in or near Jerusalem, and it will be that way at the end of this age when Christ returns, defeats His enemies, and establishes His thousand-year earthly kingdom. Where? In Jerusalem.

Q. What is the reference to the Father’s promise? What promise? (verse 4)

In John 7 we also see Jesus in Jerusalem at feast time—this time it’s the Feast of Tabernacles. On the final day of the festival week, He addressed the crowd that had gathered around Him and cried to them: ‘If anyone is thirsty, he should come to me and drink! The one who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, will have streams of water flowing from deep within him.’ He said this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were going to receive, for the Spirit had not yet been received, because Jesus had not yet been glorified (vv. 37–39).

This was very early in Jesus’s ministry, and the disciples would have been puzzled about what He was saying. They probably even forgot about it as the months passed. So when Jesus gets His people together for a final time of teaching before His death, we see Him repeating and enhancing this promise. We find ourselves then in John 14. I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Counsellor to be with you forever. He is the Spirit of truth. … But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit—the Father will send Him in My name—will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you (John 14:16, 28). So it is clear that the promise of the Father is the promise of the coming of God’s Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, who will empower the disciples for service.

Q. What was the purpose of John’s baptism?

Baptism was not invented by the Jews or by the Christian church. Baptism is an ancient ritual practice. In ancient cultures, one was baptised in water (usually) or even in milk or animal blood (ugh!), and it was meant as a sign that you were being initiated into the tribe or the community. Sometimes secret societies used baptism as an initiation rite, and if you were baptised into the society, you were afforded the privileges of membership and allowed to know and use its secret practices.

Chuck Swindoll informs us that in Judaism, new converts were ceremonially immersed in pure water after attending a variety of religious classes and learning the Hebrew language. If they passed their examinations, the males were circumcised and then baptised. This symbolised a once-and-for-all cleansing from sin and an entrance into the covenant along with the natural-born Jews.¹

But John the Baptist, the last and the greatest of the Old Covenant prophets, gave baptism a new meaning altogether. He unashamedly called upon his fellow Jews to repent, saying that their sin had excluded them from the covenant and made them unclean. He expected them to repent and be baptised again, just as they had baptised their Gentile converts. Jesus is here saying that John’s baptism is good, but it will be superseded by another baptism, this time a supernatural Spirit baptism. (See Email Exchange 1.)

Q. So, just for interest, why did Jesus go to John for baptism?

If John’s baptism was a baptism for repentance, why did the sinless Jesus go to John for baptism? We can see clearly John’s reluctance to carry through with the act of baptising Jesus, but Jesus insists. Let’s look quickly at Matthew’s record of this event in Matthew 3:11, 13–17.

John, speaking to the Jewish authorities, says:

I baptise you with water for repentance, but the One who is coming after me is more powerful than I. I am not worthy to take off His sandals. He Himself will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. … Then Jesus came to Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptised by him, but John tried to stop Him saying, I need to be baptised by You, and yet You come to me. Jesus answered him, Allow it for now for this is the way for us to fulfil righteousness. Then he allowed Him to be baptised. After Jesus was baptised, He went up immediately from the water. The heavens suddenly opened for Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming down on Him. And there came a voice from heaven: This is My beloved Son; I take delight in Him.

Commentator Michael Green suggest three reasons that Jesus submitted to baptism:

The answer Jesus gave [to John] was This is the way for us to fulfil righteousness. In the context here, righteousness refers to that quality of life that was demanded of candidates for baptism …, so by submitting to baptism, Jesus acknowledged God’s claim on Him as on others for total consecration of life and holiness of character. It is part of His life of obedience. …

This was the moment in which John was publicly to announce the arrival of the Messiah and the start of His ministry. This was symbolic anticipation of His full and profound baptism on the cross, which lay in the future. …

At the end of His ministry Jesus urged baptism upon His followers. He is here giving them the example that they should follow.²

Q. What is meant by baptised with the Holy Spirit?

This is a matter of considerable discussion and even controversy between the mainstream evangelical churches and those of a charismatic Pentecostal persuasion. (I discuss it in Email Exchange 1 below.)

69795.png

Email Exchange 1*

Holy Spirit Baptism

* These email exchanges are not real, but they could be!

From: Confused

To: Rob

Subject: Why is there all this disagreement about the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Hi, Rob,

My very good friend from a local charismatic church keeps urging me to seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It seems as if he believes it is some kind of second spiritual experience after conversion. My pastor says he’s got it all wrong.

I’m confused and a little worried that I may be missing out on something. Can you help?

70272.png

From: Rob

To: Confused

Subject: Re: Why is there all this disagreement about the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Hi, Confused,

You are right—there is considerable disagreement here.

This subject is part of a much, much larger debate on the relevance of the Pentecost experience of Acts 2. Most evangelicals suggest it was a one-off event signifying the formation of the church and not to be repeated as such as some second spiritual experience. The charismatic view is that it is normative for the Christian life today, and we are urged, after our conversion, to pray for God to baptise us with the Holy Spirit, which will be a deep, powerful spiritual experience of power. Most also claim that this will be demonstrated by the concurrent experience of the gift of tongues.

As I have said, this is a major area of discussion, which we don’t have space or time here to fully investigate. Let me say that I personally go with the mainstream evangelical view and do not see it as a distinct experience, even though I know I am here disagreeing with one of my all-time favourite Bible teachers, Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones. What I am going to do is lean on one of my other favourite Bible teachers, Dr John MacArthur, and share with you what he says in his massive theology text Biblical Doctrine. After pursuing an in-depth review of the most important Bible references, he summarises the matter in this way:

• Spirit baptism is a gracious gift from God; it is not something to be sought after, agonised over, or prayed for.

• Spirit baptism is exclusively associated with regeneration/salvation; it is not normative for it to be associated with the temporary sign of the gift of tongues or with other miraculous gifts limited to the apostolic era.

• Spirit baptism is a permanent, one-time event; it is not a reversible or recurring event.

• Spirit baptism is evidence of one’s salvation; it is not by itself the measure of one’s spiritual maturity.

• Spirit baptism is an initial blessing and an enduring result of salvation; it is not a second work of grace or a second blessing.

• Spirit baptism is inseparably linked to salvation; it is not detached from or subsequent to salvation.

• Spirit baptism is sovereignly initiated by Christ; it is not obtained by any act of the believer.

• Spirit baptism is assumed by the New Testament to be the Christ-provided experience of every believer; it is never commanded of believers to acquire or retain it.

• Spirit baptism is experienced by every Christian from Pentecost to the present time; it was not an experience of either Old Testament or Gospel-era believers.

• Spirit baptism includes every believer; it is not limited to the spiritually mature.

• Spirit baptism freely grants entrance into the universal body of Christ; it is not based on subsequent individual spiritual achievement.

• Spirit baptism is distinct from, though associated with, indwelling and filling; it is not to be equated with either one.³

So I believe that today we experience the baptism of the Holy Spirit as what MacArthur calls a positional act that takes place in the life of every Christian at the time of his or her conversion. We are baptised by the Spirit into the body of Christ.

69805.png

Q. What is significant about the Lord’s Q and A with the disciples?

So when they had come together, they asked Him, Lord, at this time are You restoring the Kingdom to Israel? He said to them, It is not for you to know times or periods that the Father has set by His own authority.

Verse 4 says, While He was together with them, and now verse 5 says, So when they had come together. What’s going on? (Here you may want to read Email Exchange 2.)

I believe verse 4 indicates a general sense of Jesus’s presence with His followers, whereas in verse 6 we see Him meeting with them over a meal and for a final time of teaching before His Ascension. It is just a way to emphasise His bodily presence with them, convincing them of His Resurrection, and letting them all know that they need have no more doubts about the fact that He is alive, even if He is soon going to leave them.

Q. What kind of kingdom (v. 6) are disciples likely referring to?

From what we can see, the two main topics of conversation and teaching between Jesus and His followers were the matter of the coming of the Holy Spirit and the idea of the kingdom. In fact, from His very earliest teaching Jesus placed the kingdom squarely at the forefront of all His exhortations. The Matthew 5 section we call the Sermon on the Mount is all about the kingdom, and it is the kingdom that is the reward for the poor in spirit (Matthew 5:3) and other spiritual seekers. Jesus teaches us to pray that the kingdom might come in His model prayer in Matthew 6:7–13. And He has been saying that the kingdom is within you (Luke 17:21) and very near (Matthew 3:2), yet the confusion persists.

One can only draw the conclusion that, despite all they have heard from Jesus, even in this final forty days of teaching, the disciples are still not clear about this. In their nervousness, their concern for their futures, they are still hoping that Jesus will indeed at that time inaugurate the political kingdom so often promised in the writing of the prophets, a promise they would have heard as they had attended synagogue teaching from their youth, which included the following:

• ‘The days are coming’—this is the Lord’s declaration—‘when I will raise up the righteous branch of David. He will reign wisely as King and administer justice and righteousness in the land’ (Jeremiah 23:5).

• The kingdom, dominion, and greatness of the kingdoms under all of heaven will be given to the people, the Holy Ones of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will serve and obey Him (Daniel 7:27).

Q. Jesus’s reply in verse 7 seems rather abrupt. What is He trying to say to the disciples (and to us)?

I think we can forgive Jesus for being a little dismayed at the disciples’ question. As John Calvin points out, There are as many errors in this question as words!³ There is so much confusion here: They asked Him, ‘Lord, at this time [they are expecting immediate action] are You restoring [expecting a political action] the kingdom to Israel [they were expecting a national kingdom]?’

I like the way commentator John Stott outlines Jesus’s response and the kind of kingdom He is speaking about in the following:⁴

• The kingdom has a spiritual character.

This kingdom does not feature on any map of the world, and power in this kingdom is totally different from the exercise of power in any earthly kingdom. This kingdom is all about God ruling in the hearts of His people. It is spread by witnesses, not armies; it is a kingdom of peace, not of arms.

• The kingdom has an international membership.

Verse 8 shows us that this kingdom is going to include citizens from all over the world. It is going to eventually include far more Gentile members than Jewish ones. God is going to rule over a kingdom in which ethnicity, social status, age, and gender will be no barrier to membership.

• The kingdom has a gradual expansion.

It will not happen immediately at this time. It will indeed have an explosive start, many thousands within weeks, but will take years and years in its building, and the building will not be complete until every citizen is confirmed and the King can return.

"It is