Chapter Two Outline:

I. Witness in Jerusalem(Acts 1-7)

<A-C in Chapter One>

D. Appearance of the Holy Spirit (2:1-13)

E. Assembly with Peter (2:14-40)

F. A New Fellowship (2:41-47)

Summary [Chapter 2]: A short time later on the day of Pentecost, the disciples were together inJerusalempraying and the Holy Spirit came upon them. This enabled them to tell the good news about the Lord in many languages that they had never learned before an international crowd of Jews gathered for the Feast. Peter followed the initial incident with an address to the excited and perplexed crowd explaining from the prophet Joel and from the words of David what had begun that day in their presence. He proclaimed salvation through faith in Messiah and more than three thousand people were saved.

Chapter Two

2:1 “Pentecost”: This is the Hebrew feast Shavuot literally translated “Weeks”. The feast marks the timing of the giving of the Torah to Moses onMt.Sinai. The rabbis associate this timing because of the key statements found in the Book of Exodus. A quick review of the book may help – in Exodus 1-3 God raised up Moses; in Ex.4-6 He took Moses through the seminary of the wilderness and brought him back; Ex.6-12 contains the ten plagues; Ex.12-15 Pharaoh changed his mind and chased after Moses and the people, the great sea is opened, the horse and rider of the Egyptians were swallowed up into the sea; by Ex.15 the party commences. God took the Israelites to Marah’s bitter waters, then to Elim where there are wonderful palm trees. Eventually God led them to the “Mountain of the Law” (ch.15-19). In Exodus, the scene followed the arrival at the mountain in Exodus 19, but “cut” to the text of the contents of the Law in Exodus 20–31. To follow the story, a student of the text must “jump” from chapter 19 to 32 to get to the next scene.

Exodus 12 states the people set out on the journey at Passover – the 14^th/15th of the month of Nisan. Fifty days later they arrived at themountain ofSinai (Ex. 19). Thus Shavuot occurred fifty days after Pesach (a careful reading of Exodus 12 & 19 show the Israelites started out from Egypt and they ended at Sinai exactly fifty days later). This is the connection of Passover (Pesach) and Shavuot (Pentecost), and explains the name “fifty” chosen by the Greek translators of the Septuagint version. When the Israelites came to the mountain of the Law several events are recorded (Exodus 19:10-11). The people drew together all at one place and got washed and got cleaned.

All the Israelites were at the mountain. Boundaries were put around the mountain and when Moses went up on the mountain, he returned (after forty days) and found many Israelites having a party down at the bottom. Trace the story carefully from Exodus 19 to 32, and the elements are telling: when the Israelites got to the mountain there were strange winds, fire settled on the mountain and there was strange weather. Moses came off the mountain with the revelation of God and 3000 people were killed by the command of Moses by the sword of faithful Levites. They were executed because of their idolatry and debauchery before the Mountain of the Law.

The writer of Acts 2 (Luke) recounts the Pentecost setting as “Shavuot II – the sequel”. He is reminded of the story of the first Shavuot, as God revealed Himself at Sinai. He recalls the sound of wind, sees the “tongue-shaped” fire and recalls the strange weather that descended long ago onMt.Sinai. These details he recalled in the Upper Room as the next revelation of God was made known, the coming of the Holy Spirit to write the Law on the hearts of men, not merely on tablets of stone! He understood the Divine imagery and connection and supplied the detail that this time 3000 lived eternally, and did not experience the judgement the 3000 had experienced at Sinai! When the Torah came, it brought the knowledge of sin, and with it the knowledge of why men died. With the coming of the Spirit in Acts 2 there was knowledge of life everlasting. The compilation of Exodus 19 & 32 should be compared to Acts 2, for that is Luke’s purpose in sharing the events at Shavuot. A full understanding of the earlier Shavuot is essential to understanding the narrative of Acts 2.

It would be easy for some to say the story is told to show that “law brings death” and the “Spirit brings life” – but that is not what the passage says at all. That characterizes the Torah as something negative, something the Biblical writer never did. In fact, the writers of the Scripture exclaimed “I love thy Law” and “the Law is perfect”. The narrative actually reveals that in the revelation of the written Torah of God came the knowledge of our own sinfulness; and in the knowledge of our own sinfulness, only those who violate it or refuse to observe those truths face the penalty because they were violating the truth. With the coming of the Spirit there was something different; it wasn’t just the Spirit aiding in obedience, it was the Spirit living within. Those who followed the revelation of God’s truth through the Spirit of God within lived eternally. The emphasis was not that with Torah came death; it was rather: with Torah came knowledge of how life should be with the One who would give His people life. In other words, the purpose of Torah was primarily life. Yet it was through the Spirit one could experience God on the most intimate, inner level.

Remember that God was not well understood to the Israelites when they reached the Mountain of the Law. Even Moses, when he stood at the bush long ago said, “I don’t even know what your name is”. Part of the purpose of the Torah was to expose the character of the living God, and that is how they came to understand what He was like. The promise of the New Covenant was that God would eventually write the Law on the hearts of men (Jer. 31-32).

2:3 “tongues” – this is the first occurrence of the term in the book of Acts. For other places this gift is used, see note on 19:6. In order to clarify the miraculous work of God in the narratives on tongues, it may be helpful to examine some of the terms used in the events:

First, the term “unknown” (in 1 Cor.14: 2, 4, 13, 14, 19 and 27) is not in the original Greek manuscripts and is italicized to show it has been inserted to help the reader. As an insertion, the word is irrelevant to understanding the original intent.

Second, the term for the “tongue” is a translation of (a form of) the Greek term glossa. It was used as follows: 1. (Lexically) “the organ of speech or the noise that the organ (the tongue) makes; 2. (By implication) the language spoken by the mouth: note that Acts 2:6 uses the term as languages known to the audience. Acts 10 refers to the event as “the same as” what happened in Acts 2. This it must be a language as well. Acts 19:6 implies that the tongues were a part of the prophecy in the place, but is inconclusive. 1 Cor. 14:21 indicates that the “tongues” atCorinth relate to the quoted prophecies of the Old Covenant (Dt. 28:49 and Isaiah 28:11). In these prophecies, “other tongues” clearly refers to human languages spoken to nations other thanIsrael, for a witness to them.

Third, exception to the use of the term glossa for the miraculous tongue appears in the argument of 1 Cor. 12:10, 12:28, 14:10 and 14:28. The terms used are derived from the term genos translated “kinds”. The term is used to denote nationalities and races (cp. “stock” of Phil. 3:15). The implication is again a reference to known language that others among them understand. Based solely on New Testament language use, tongues appears to be a gift of “unlearned linguistic skill” to speak an actual known language without learning it. Though some scholars suggest this, it does not appear (linguistically) to refer to an “ecstatic utterance” of unintelligible sounds in any of the narratives, with the possible exception of the argument in 1 Cor. 12-14.

In addition to the terms, some helpful insight may be gained additional study of the context of “tongues passages” in the New Testament:

-There are passages where the term “Baptism of the Spirit” and speaking in tongues appear linked. In other passages, one of the two phenomena appears without the other. There does not appear to be a causative link between the two. Some scholars argue that 1 Cor. 12:13 seems to show that all believers have been baptized in the Spirit, yet the chapter goes on to ask, “Do all speak in tongues?” The implication is “Of course not!” If this interpretation is correct, there is no causative link between the Baptism of the Spirit and speaking in tongues except that they are both actions of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.

-There is no Biblical connection between any specific gift and the spirituality of the one who operates in the gift. Corinthian believers had many gifts, yet the church suffered from sinful practices and was not at all “spiritual” in this sense. The gifts were helpful to build up the body, but did not immunize people from sin in any way. There is no cause to suggest that those who spoke in tongues were more “spiritual” in behavior than those who exercised other gifts in the church.

-There is no instruction for anyone in the church to impart specific gifts to others, though there are narratives that suggest such practices occurred in the time of the Apostles. Even at that time, it is doubtful that any human choice was involved in receiving specific gifts, but the use of that which God gave was a matter of obedience. A whole church may pray for gifted individuals to be sent from God in areas where they lack. The instruction of Paul in 1 Cor. 12:31 to “covet earnestly the best gifts” was not for individuals, but is addressed to the whole church, as the Greek “you” in the command is plural, to the entire congregation.

-The gift of tongues was presented as a temporary gift in nature. 1 Cor. 13:8 claimed a stopping point for the exercise of the gift. The time of cessation is problematic (“cease”: Greek pauo: to stop, halt) and is variously described by scholars as: 1. when the Bible was completed; 2. when Jesus returns for the believers; 3. the end of the Church Age. One thing is agreed, the gift has an ending point according to the aforementioned verses.

-The use of the gift of tongues, and any other gift, was controlled and regulated. There is no text that indicates the use of the gift was not in the control of the believer. In fact, standards introduced inCorinthdemonstrate the believers had specific control of the function of tongues. Paul told them they had to have interpreter, or remain silent. If this was an irresistible urge of the Spirit, as some have argued, how do you stop to consider the rules of Scripture? There were to be no more than three per meeting (I Cor. 14:27). Though men were not to regulate the speaking in tongues beyond that which God instructed in the Bible (I Cor. 14:39), the Apostle was “forbidding” one to speak inCorinthif the Scriptural conditions were not met.

-The normal use of tongues was as a witness to the unbeliever in the various narratives of Acts, and the Pauline instruction includes this idea (I Cor. 14:21-22). The use of the gift appears to have been consistently in settings where the unbeliever could hear!

-There are those that argue on the basis of 1 Corinthians 14:1-17 for another type of tongue used as an ecstatic prayer language. If there is another use of the tongues gift as an individual “prayer language” in that passage, it stands alone in the New Testament and deserves serious study as a separate matter. It does not seem that this should have been included in the gift list to “build up the Body” as the orientation of 1 Cor. 14 suggests individual, but not corporate use (1 Cor. 14:4).

2:5 “devout men” : These were Jews who had traveled from all over the then known world to worship during the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot) in Jerusalem, the spiritual center for all the Jews (Acts 2:5-13).  It is in Jerusalem after the preaching of Peter, that out of these men, the first three thousand people repented, believed and were baptized in the Name of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:41).  Thus the gospel began inJerusalem. After this,Jerusalem became a place where great miracles and signs and wonders were experienced and witnessed at the hands of the apostles (Acts 2:43; 5:16). Many believers were added to the number of believers and the Word of God and the preaching of Jesus increased. (Acts 2:47; 4:4; 5: 14, 42; 6: 7)

2:15 “third hour”: Since it was customary (and still is) to fast on the first half of feast days that include services at the local synagogue, he argued that is was not possible they were drunken. The third hour in this case should be understood as “the third hour of the daylight”, or about 9 A.M.

2:17 “last days”: The period of the New Covenant began with the salvation of a remnant of Jews (Rom. 11:5), was followed by the opening of the Good News to the Gentiles (Rom. 11:11), and will eventually consummate in the salvation of the Jews (Rom. 11:26-35) as promised to Jeremiah (cp. 31 and 32). The entire period is referred to as the “last days” as it reflects the final countdown of God’ program.

2:27 “hell”: literally “Hades”, the abode of the dead or the grave. It was clear that since they all knew of the place of David’s tomb, David must have been speaking of the Messiah and not himself.

2:34 “he saith”: a reference to Ps. 110:1. The context of Ps. 110 may well be after Nathan’s prophetic address. Peter connects the Psalm 110:1 quote to the Ascension of Jesus. For other important Psalm connections to Messiah see also Ps. 2:6ff, Ps. 22.

2:38 (and others) “baptise”: The Greek word is partially transliterated rather than properly translated in this case. The term means to “cover with, normally to immerse”. The term is used in the Septuagint in relation to the High Priests work at the Mercy Seat in the Tabernacle, and thus must be seen as “totally covering”. The term is used in the Gospels and Acts specifically in reference to a practice that came out of Jewish congregations during the exile intoBabylon. There appears to earlier reference to the practice, though it can be generally linked to ritual cleansing as far back as the Tabernacle.

There appear to be several methods of ritual cleansings (referred to in Hebrew as a mikveh) during the time of theSecondTemple. The difference between Jewish ritual baptism (Mikveh) and the Messianic or Christian baptism practice appears to be the number of times it was performed. The Messianic use appears to been done once only (as the sacrifice of Jesus). In the Book of Acts the baptism followed the repentance of individuals from sin upon accepting the gospel of salvation through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. In Jewish practice, the mikveh was performed many times in a person’s life, if performed for the purpose of preparation forTemple worship. Though Paul clearly stated that only one baptism was necessary in relation to the faith he had in Jesus, he continued to mikveh to enter the Temple (as in Acts 21:26ff). The Jewish practice included:

1. Proselyte baptism: this practice was used by a Gentile born man or woman who observed ritual bathing as part of a much longer process for joining to the covenant that God made with Israel. This appears to have been done by bathing in the nude in an enclosed and private pool set aside for this purpose.
2. Ritual ablution: performed in a similar way to the proselyte baptism, this was used in the ablution for those who needed cleansing according to rabbinic standards. Women were required to undergo this practice after the monthly cycle, as were those who had touched any dead thing. These standards are outlined in the “Taharoth (Purity) Laws” of the Mishnah.
3. Vow ablution: also done in the nude in a room alone, these baptisms were done in preparation for the initiation or completion of a holy vow. An example of this practice in Acts is found in 21:26. The place for such a practice was no doubt the Mikvaot on the south porch of theTemple.
4. Preparation baptism: there is no actual precedent for this outside the record of the work of John the Baptizer. Virtually no scholar accepts that John had scores of people strip all of their clothing off to baptize themselves in theJordan. We are unsure of the methodology used by John, but can conclude that the purpose was to outwardly show repentance and preparation for the coming of the Kingdom.

The practice became one of the congregations of followers of Jesus by holy command, as found in Mt. 28:19. Jesus commanded this particular symbol as one of the physical examples of joining the faith community of the believers. Peter’s preaching in Acts 2 and later in Acts 10 offered some theological rationale to the command. He preached: Repent of your sin and believe in the sacrifice of Jesus for their atonement. Once one believed, this step of faith showed obedience to a command from Jesus.  A number of examples of this obedience are recorded in Acts, as that of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:38). For more detail on this event, see the note under 8:38.

Some scholars suggest the best example of Paul’s explanation of the symbolic meaning of baptism may be found in Romans 6:4.  This verse refers to a believer being buried by that baptism into death, and afterwards being raised up from death into a new life.  Some make the illusion that the death and resurrection symbolized dying to an old life of sin and disobedience, with resurrection from death out of the water representing being born into a new life of obedience to God’s word.

As the theology of the church developed, some understood the practice of baptism to be a substitute for the covenant symbol of circumcision, as practiced by Jews. They developed a sacramental theology approach, accepting covenant symbols in the church as equivalent to covenant symbols of the ancient Israelites. In this regard, these theologians considered the church as the inheritor of God’s program and thought that Jews were “disinherited”, a position not uncommon in Christian theology today. The sacramental use of the symbol is practiced in many denominations, and usually is common among those who believe the church has replacedIsraelin both spiritual position and blessing.

Further, historians note that methods varied among communities almost from the earliest centuries. The observance of baptizing in the nude was practiced during the Byzantine period, which included the witness of the deacons (or in the case of women deaconesses). The immersion pool was surrounded by the witnesses, but the water was only entered by the candidate. In addition, the candidate immersed three specific times, one for each of the members of the Trinity. Entering from the west and bowing into the water to the east, north and south, allowed the entire process to mimic a cross (cp. Rom. 6). About a dozen cruciform baptismal pools have been uncovered from this period, and several are on display in places like Tabgha (near theSea of Galilee) and Avdat (in the Negev of Israel).

Randy’s Bible Commentary Notes on Acts chapter one:

Chapter One Outline:

I. Witness in Jerusalem (Acts 1-7)

A. Introduction (1:1-3)

B. Ascension of Messiah (1:4-11)

C. Appointment of Matthias (1:12-26)

Summary [Chapter One]: This second letter written to Theophilus continues the story of the spread of the Gospel that he began in the Gospel According to St. Luke. This second epic opens with Jesus (after His Death and Resurrection) meeting His disciples and instructing them in Jerusalem. Jesus told them to gather and wait there until the coming of the Holy Spirit and then He ascended into Heaven. His disciples went back to Jerusalem and selected a replacement for Judas by casting lots. They narrowed the choices by character to two men: Joses (called Barnabas) and Matthias, who was eventually chosen.

Chapter One

1:1 “former treatise” no doubt refers to the Gospel According to Luke, based not only on this assertion, but also on the style and grammar of the two writings. It may be that these were two parts of an unfinished (or partially lost) trilogy, with the Gospel According to Luke the things done by Jesus the Messiah, and Acts showing the things done by the Risen Messiah through His Holy Spirit. An early reference to the Lukan authorship is found in the Anti-Marcionite Prologue to Luke (160 CE). For others, see notes on the Muratorian canon, or the works of the Apostolic, Apologetic and Later Church Fathers: Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian.

1:2 “Apostles”: (Greek: apostolos), means one who is sent forth or messenger.  This was a person chosen and given a specific assignment with the full authority of the one who sent him. This was a common and abundantly used word. (Acts 2: 37, 42, 43; 4: 33,36; 5:12,18,29,34,40; Acts 6:6, 8:1,14; 9:27; 11:1; 14:4,14; 15:2,4,6,22,23,33, Acts 16:4, Romans 1:1, 11:13; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1,2; 15: 9; Hebrews 3:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Colossians 1:1; Matthew 10:2; Mark 6:30; Luke 6:13; 9:10; 11:49; 17:5; Romans 16:7; 1 Corinthians 4:9; 9:5; 12:28,29; 15:7,9; Ephesians 2:20; 3:5; 4:11; 1 Thessalonians 2:6; 2 Peter 3:2; Jude 17; Revelations 2:2; 18:20; 21:14)

The word Apostle specifically refers in Luke’s narrative to the initial 12 chosen disciple of Jesus.  Most were with Him during the course of His ministry and they saw Him after His Resurrection.  They were commissioned to be His witnesses to the far ends of the earth (Matthew 28:17).  They are also together with the prophets recorded as the foundation of the household of God with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone.

The Twelve are thought by some to have been chosen as follows: Andrew and his brother Simon Peter, (Matthew 4:18-20), then James and John – the sons of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21,22), these four were fishermen.  Then came Philip and Nathanael (also named Bartholomew – John 1:43-51).  Then came Matthew, called Levi a tax collector (Matthew 4:9-13), Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot or Cananaean, Judas, the brother of James and Judas Iscariot (Matthew 5:1-4).

Among them, the Disciples Peter, John and James were often taken aside by the Lord and would have been his inner circle.  Peter was more the leader of the Twelve, while John has been widely accepted as “the Apostle whom Jesus had a special love for” (John 19:26).  These three were present at the transfiguration (Mark 4:2), at the raising from the dead of Jairus’ daughter (Mark 5:37) and in the garden of Gethsemane during the last hour before Jesus was captured.

Judas Iscariot was the keeper of the moneybag (John 13:29) and was known to have betrayed Jesus for money (John 13:2).  He hanged himself (Matthew 27:3-5).  Thomas was known for wanting physical proof of Jesus’ resurrection for him to believe.

They were trained by Jesus, yet still were not able to grasp what his mission to earth was, believing that he was about to set up a kingdom and restore Israel(Acts1:6).  Eleven of the twelve (not Judas Iscariot) were re-commissioned by the Lord Jesus, after His resurrection, to be His witnesses to the far ends of the earth (Luke 24:46-49) After the loss of Judas, Matthias was chosen by lots and took his place (Acts 1:23,26).

The apostles were regarded as ‘unlearned men’ by the priests, theTemplecaptain, and the Sadducees when Peter and John were brought before them because of preaching Jesus and His Resurrection (Acts 4:13).  This probably means that they only had elementary rather than higher education.

The word apostle was also used to identify those who were not of the Twelve, but who had seen the risen Christ and were also commissioned by Him.  Paul defended his Apostleship on the basis of having met with the Lord Jesus (on the way to Damascus) and on the basis of his highly effective ministry to the Gentiles (I Corinthians 15: 6-10).

James, the Lord’s brother was also counted an apostle.  He was probably not a believer of Jesus before the crucifixion.  The Lord Jesus appeared to him “After that, He was seen of James, then of all the apostles.” (1 Corinthians 15: 7).  “…He was seen…then of all the apostles…” seems to refer to a wider group of people more than the Twelve apostles.  I Corinthians 15: 5, indicates that Jesus was already seen by the Twelve.

It was agreed among the apostles that Paul and Barnabas were to concentrate on reaching the Gentiles while Peter, John and James (the Lord’s brother), were to continue their work among the Jews (Galatians 2:7-9).  Paul also indicated that the apostles were exposed to much danger, and suffering,  “For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men…. Even unto the present hour, we both hunger, and thirst, are naked, and are buffeted and have no certain dwelling place.”  (1 Corinthians 4: 9-13)  Paul counts these hardships as taking part in the sufferings of Christ (Romans 8:17; 2 Corinthians 1:5-7).  Most of the apostles are traditionally recorded to have been faithful and lived a persecuted life and apart from John, died gruesome deaths.

1:3 Of the “many proofs” note that Luke had previously recorded that the Disciples spoke with Jesus (Lk. 24:13-32), ate with Jesus (24:13ff) and could see His physical scars (24:39-40). Luke clearly stated a physical resurrection was part of the body of teaching of the early Christian movement.

1:3 “forty days”: This is the only reference to the length of Jesus’ ministry to the Disciples between the Resurrection and Ascension. Though obviously a serious recounting of the actual length of time, this may also allude to other important forty-day spans in the Bible. The time period is elsewhere a record of God’s great movements on the earth, i.e. in the time of the flood (Gen. 7:4;8:6); in the time God and Moses communed together on the Mountain of the Law (Ex. 24:18; Dt. 9:9); in the time Jesus suffered attacks of Satan in the Judean Wilderness (Mt. 4:2; Mk. 1:13; Lk. 4:2) . Others note the Biblical statement for the length of embalming a dead body (Gen. 50:3).

1:5 “Holy Spirit”: The work of the Holy Spirit was not unknown to the Disciples (cp. Jn. 14:17; 20:22) but the work was about to change. The promise of Jesus was that He would no longer be aiding from alongside the Disciples, but would be indwelling them in a way they had not experienced before. This is one step toward the work of the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31). The rest of the new agreement would not happen for a long time (and still has not yet happened!). A close look at the New Covenant promise in the Jeremiah 31 prophecy includes an abstract time line:

a)     the days will come (future to Jeremiah – 31:27) when the landIsraelandJudahwill be desolate and broken (27,28);

b)    in those days people will begin to take personal responsibility for the destruction (29,30);

c)     the days will come (after that time) the Lord will offer a New Covenant (31) toIsrael. (It will be a different kind of covenant than Sinai (32).

d)    Some time AFTER the offer (31:33) God would begin to “write the Law on the hearts” of the people ofIsrael.

e)     The nation will be drawn back to God (34) and all will be saved! (34)

f)      God promised that the relationship withIsraelwould be fulfilled and not set aside EVER (35,36).

The move of the Holy Spirit to inside the Disciples was equivalent to the “Word” dwelling in them richly (note the same results from the “work of the Spirit” in Ephesians 5 to the “work of the Word of Christ” within in Colossians 3). The believer was called to operate in the power of the Holy Spirit, which was the same as operating in the Word of Christ. The work of the Spirit performs the promises of Messiah in the guidelines given in the Scriptures.

The brief time that Jesus shared the “breath” of the Spirit with the Disciples (Jn. 14:17) was perhaps the one time they could use to distinguish the experience in the new work the Spirit was doing in them. Had Jesus not done this, they may have been unable to distinguish the nature and source of the work in Acts. The Disciples were prepared by Jesus, however, and knew the work was from above, the beginning of the New Covenant promise that would not be completed in one instant (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Note that Peter realized the work would culminate in the salvation ofIsrael, but not that day!

1:11 “in like manner”: the return of Messiah should therefore be public, to theMount of Olives and miraculous. For later Apostolic material on the return of Jesus, cp. Rev. 1:8 and 19:11-16.

w1:12 “Sabbath”: (see also Acts 1:12; 13:14,27,42,44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4; Colossians 2:16; Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 20:8-11; Leviticus 23:3; 26:2). Sabbath (Hebrew: shabbat) is literally translated “rest” or “cessation of normal activities”. The origin of the Biblical Sabbath is found in Genesis 2:1-3.

Observance of the Sabbath day is first mentioned in the book of Exodus 16:23, when the children ofIsraelwere in the desert.  It became a symbol of the Covenant relationship between the children ofIsraeland the God of Abraham given to Moses onMount Sinai(Exodus 20:8-11).

Though part of the observance of the Sabbath a day was rest and refreshment before God, it also a day of holy assembly or worship unto Him (Leviticus 23:3). In addition, it served as a constant reminder of God’s continued covenant withIsrael(Ezekiel 20:12), and was later applied as a reminder to them that God had delivered them from Egyptian slavery.  The Israelites were expected to keep it with such seriousness that Sabbath breakers were to be stoned to death.  No fire was kindled and no sticks were gathered (labor associated with other days of the week).

The prophets considered proper observance of the Sabbath day as a litmus test of obedience to God. They argued that it directly affected the success and standing of the people ofIsraelandJerusalem, or their downfall and decay of the city ofJerusalem.  In that way they considered the Sabbath observance as a thermometer for the spiritual condition of the Israelites (Jeremiah 17: 19-27; Nehemiah 13: 15-22, Isaiah 58:13, Ezekiel 20:12,24, 22:8).

The term Sabbath was not only used for the 7^th day of the week and also for special observance days, feasts and periodic observance years. The Day of Atonement was referred to as a Sabbath (Leviticus 23:32), Feast of Unleavened Bread (Leviticus 23:7,8), and the seventh year in the growing cycle (Sabbatical year). These were prescribed for the Hebrews and included foreigners who dwelt among the Israelites, called those who “drew near to cleave to the God of Israel”.

The Sabbath year of rest for the land was observed after six years, Leviticus 25:4, “But in the seventh year shall be a Sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard.”

The Year of Jubilee was calculated by the Sabbath years, Leviticus 25: 8, 10 “ And thou shalt number seven Sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven Sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years.” ”And you shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.”

In the wrestling of the early Rabbinic courts of the Sanhedrin over how best to keep the Sabbath rest the commands were developed and systemized such that by the time of Jesus, proper observance of the Sabbath restricted many acts not specified by the Torah. Some prohibited extensions of mercy, causing great controversy and contention among the religious leadership in the Gospel accounts of the ministry of Jesus.  An example of this was a case of the Pharisees expressing great problem with the healing ministry of Jesus on the Sabbath. Another example is found in the account where Jesus allowed His disciples to pick grain to satisfy hunger on a Sabbath.

The Gospel accounts share that Jesus argued against this particular Rabbinic standard by expressing the purpose of the Sabbath, and the priority of the people. He replied to the argument: (cp. Mk. 2:23-28) “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: so that the Son of man is lord even of the Sabbath.” To the question of showing mercy in healing, (Matthew 12:10,12) Jesus replied, “Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days.”  Other references include Matthew 13:1-14; Luke 6:1-11, John 5:1-18. It appears that Mishnaic rabbis (after this time) agreed with Jesus’ interpretation of the mercy on Sabbath approach (as certainly some did during His lifetime) and their teaching included the ability to show mercy and to heal on Sabbath in later periods.

In the earliest movement of the church in Acts most followers of Jesus were Jews who kept the Sabbath. As the message of the Gospel progressed into the Greco-Roman world under the ministry of Paul, Barnabas, Silas, Timothy and many others the meetings were both on Sabbath and on other days, “daily and houses to house”. For these Messianic Jews, the Sabbath continued to be a symbol of God’s everlasting covenant throughout the Book of Acts. For Gentile believers in Jesus, it was a question of choice (Col. 2:16). When Jewish believers attempted to enforce such practices on the Gentile believers, Paul withstood them on the basis of misappropriation of the covenant symbols. For more on the day of the week for the meeting of the early believers, see comments on Acts 20:7.

1:12 “Sabbath day’s journey”: a distance of about half a mile, which is the distance allowed for travel on the Sabbath day, according to rabbinic tradition. Though the Bible did not express such a specific distance, any person travelling in excess of 2000 cubits (3000 feet) was accused of breaking the fourth commandment statement: (Ex 16:29) “…let no man go out of his place on the seventh day”.  The size of the “place” was based on Numbers 35:5 which measures out the “suburbs” of the cities in cubits:  2000 cubits to the east, 2000 cubits to the south, 2000 cubits to the west and 2000 cubits to the north side of the city.  These suburbs may have been the pasturelands around the cities on which inhabitants of the cities planted their crops and put their flocks to grazing. At various excavation sites of ancientIsrael, archaeologists have identified the stones placed at the outer extremities of these suburbs at what may have been the lawful limits of a Sabbath day’s journey.

Acts 1:13 “Upper room”: The Greek term for this room is huper-o’-on, a different term than the kataluma of John 13-17. The term used in John reflects a different location, and was used only there and in association with the term “inn” (where there was no room for Jesus’ birth – Lk. 2). The term in John is loosely translated “furnished guest chamber”. In a setting like this one (a place used for banqueting) one could expect the place to have been a triclinium (three sided reclining table).

Apparently the place was large (Acts 1:13) and had adjacent living quarters, as the disciples may have stayed there for some period. Banquet rooms (triclinia) were normally a main floor feature of a private villa of wealthy Romans of the period. Numerous examples have been uncovered, including four contemporary examples in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.  Scholars suggest the home may have been that of Mark’s mother, who (according to Acts 12:12) was the owner of the home where many people were praying in the early believing community.

According to early Christian writers, an “upper room” was still intact a century after the crucifixion of Jesus, yet it is difficult to know if the room was that of the Last Supper, or of the events in Acts 1. The “upper room” visited by Christian pilgrims inJerusalemtoday recalls the room of the Last Supper. It is located in the same building as the Tomb of David (on the floor directly above) and is a barrel-vault Gothic style building of the 1300s. This room features a Moslem prayer niche (from when it was changed to a mosque, along with beautiful windows that have been recently restored. Often pilgrims confuse the setting of the two events (the Last Supper and Pentecost), which have only been celebrated in the same location in the last 500 years. A careful look at the venue for the Last Supper demands a private place, whereas the setting for the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost appears to be a public setting.

1:15 “stood up”: What a remarkable transformation in Peter! He had denied Jesus three times (Jn. 18). He was conspicuously quiet at the appearances of Jesus in the Upper Room (Jn. 20:26ff). Two events gave Peter a holy boldness: 1. The public acceptance of Jesus (in front of the other Disciples) by the shore of the Sea after the denials (Jn. 21); and 2. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1ff).

1:26 “lots”: This sounds like gambling, but actually has a solid Biblical precedent (compare Prov. 16:33; Jonah 1:7). The scapegoat was chosen in this way (Lev. 16:8ff). The Bible record does not condemn the method of choice here or elsewhere. Remember, the Book of Acts is a narrative, not an instruction. The point is NOT to get this methodology for church decision-making, it is a simple record of what they did. Some Scriptures are simple narratives (like Gideon and his fleece – cp. Judges 6-8). In such cases, one can appreciate the story without feeling the need to imitate it.

This place list includes both the place names and the address in the Book of Acts that the place is mentioned. The chart forms an overview of the geography of the book, filled with the travels of Paul and co.

Places in The Book of Acts

* Place name omitted in Acts but provided elsewhere in the New Testament

** Mentioned but not visited

The Book of Acts is a complex letter. It appears that part of the letter was written to catalog the spread of the Gospel geographically to various people groups. Luke probably intended to offer evidence of the fulfillment Jesus’ promise before His Ascension from the Mount of Olives: “You shall be witnesses to me in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the uttermost parts of the earth” (Acts 1:8b). The letter seems formed around this geography, with the movement of the Gospel in Jerusalem (Acts 1:1-8:3), Judea and Samaria
(8:4-40) and beyond (9-28).

Within the geographical frame above, Luke also clarifies some of the key challenges faced by the early Messianic movement. He appears to systematically move between the internal and external crises of the believers. In the early stage of the narrative he mentions the frequent threats against the Messianic leaders by the Temple authorities (4:3-7; 5:17-27), which led to the stoning of one of the Messianic leaders (6:8-7:60). Later external pressures included the rampages of Saul of Tarsus that ransacked the houses of suspected believers in Jesus in a manhunt (9:1-5). In addition to the external pressures, the movement internally fought against complaints of inequity in matters of finance among its members (6:1-7), and even lying in matters of property between followers (5:1-11). The leadership struggled to define the community of believers, and attempted to reconcile the promises of the Hebrew Scriptures to the reality of the work of the Spirit in the Gentile born followers of Jesus (Acts 11:1-18; 15:1, 6-35; 21:21-25). This pressure plagued the Messianic movement throughout the period of the writings of the various letters of the Apostles to the congregations (Epistles).

Another emphasis of the letter includes an insightful narrative of the chief personalities of the leaders in the new movement. Biographical sketches are drawn from the glimpses in the letter of individuals like Peter (2:14-5:42; 9:32-11:18), Stephen (6:1-7:60), Philip (8:1-40), Barnabas (11:19-30; 13:1-14:28) and of course Paul (9:1-31,11:25-30, 12:24-14:28, 15:36-28:31). This view of the leaders is critical to our understanding, since it is often difficult to see a balanced perspective of the leaders from their writings. Many Epistles address certain arguments or problems in the fledgling congregations, without giving a sufficient background of the writer. This narrative gives a cross reference to a number of their struggles, and offers context to their other writings.

One of the most critical features of the letter is the explanation of the so-called “New Covenant” and its beginnings in the Gentile world. The Hebrew Scriptures promised that a “New Covenant” was coming to the Jewish people. A careful study of the Hebrew texts of this covenant offer no hint that Gentiles would in any way be a part of the plan. In fact, the covenant as it is described in the Hebrew Scriptures is primarily about the return of the people to the land and their hearts to the God of Abraham (Jer. 31:27-40; 32:37-40; Isa. 59:20-21; Ezek. 16:60-63, 37:21-28). One of the specific purposes of the letter to Theophilus appears to explain that while this is completely true, it was not complete. The New Covenant, according to Luke, BEGAN with a small number of Jews (cp. Acts 1 and 2), then entailed a dramatic conversion of many Gentiles (Acts 10:28-29) and would eventually END with the fulfillment of a Kingdom of Jews that knew their Messiah (Acts 2:17-21). The expansion of the New Covenant to include the Gentile was probably the dominant theme in the latter half of the letter.

Finally, there is ample evidence the letter intended to offer a new and expanded explanation of the nature of the God of Abraham. Since the world of the Jews was thoroughly monotheistic, the letter attempted to offer some small explanation to the Messianic view of God. This view was an expansion of the traditional Jewish approach, not an attempt to depart from it. The view of the Hebrew text was simply that God is One. The view of the Messianic believers was that the one and only true God revealed Himself in a variety of personality roles. Each personality role was complete: independent in intellect, emotion and will. In that way, the one God was multiple in personality, but, in contrast to paganism, God was not multiple in Essence – thus an extension of the essential Hebrew monotheism. The difference may appear slight, but to the Apostles it was the marking line between a pagan view, and the view consistent with the Hebrew Scriptures, which they viewed to be the exclusively true Word of God. Examples of this in the letter appear in the personification of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:2,5,8), the Heavenly Father (1:4) and the obedient Son (2:27). Special emphasis in the sermons of the Apostles show a distinction of personality between each of the three (Acts 2:32-33). In that way the Messianic movement believed that their approach offered an expanded view of the God of Abraham.