Acts by Jaroslav Pelikan (Brazos Theological Commentary of the Bible: Brazos Press) This significant commentary kicks off the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible series, which will eventually grow to a library of 40 volumes. Unlike other commentaries that are written mostly by biblical scholars, these books will be penned by theologians interested in what the Bible has to say about enduring theological questions; as series editor R.R. Reno puts it, the series "was born out of the conviction that dogma clarifies rather than obscures." Pelikan's contribution, for example, is less about the socioeconomic conditions that informed Paul's missionary journeys than it is about systematic theology, Christian doctrine and the formation of the early church. Pelikan asks big questions: what is sin? what were the earliest creeds? what is the nature of apostleship? He is sensitive to nuances of Greek but not obsessed by them. As such, this book will be helpful to preachers and, to a lesser extent, general readers who are sometimes flummoxed by more specialized and technical biblical commentaries.

In 1905, exactly a hundred years ago, Adolf von Harnack urged upon his pupil and colleague, Karl Holl, his "fundamental conviction that those church his­torians whose concentration is, as ours is, on early church history must always be ready, when the situation requires it, to take on the exposition of a book of the New Testament."' He lived up to that rule himself when he published his book on Acts in 1908, which soon thereafter was translated into English.2 I have always believed in that rule, too. But I have never been able to live up to it myself until now, when I am also doing so with a commentary on Acts, as part of this series of theological commentaries on the Bible. Examining the first account of the first generations does seem a fitting way to follow up on over a half century of studying the history of the church and the development of its doctrine from those first generations and into all subsequent periods.

In many ways I am at heart a philologist, and, coming from a polyglot home, I have since childhood taken special delight in the permutations of grammar and etymology, especially then also in Greek and Latin. But whenever I have been asked whether I am a classicist, I have usually replied that I am interested in Greek and Latin only after they became world languages, for by training and scholarly experience I am a historian of Christian doctrine. As a rule, I have not so much investigated what the Bible meant as what it has been taken to mean. But the invitation, in my eightieth year, to join other scholars outside the biblical field in this theological commentary project was irresistible. 

Acts: The Gospel of the Spirit by Justo L. Gonzalez (Orbis) The book we call "Acts of the Apostles" is really the "Acts of the Holy Spirit," an insight that has stood the test of time, and which proves the key to this vital book. Justo Gonzalez takes this insight deeper, inserting the Gospel of the Spirit into its social context. Each verse is discussed in terms of both its social and theological implications. 

There is no better way to study a book of the Bible than reading that book itself. Therefore, many of the matters that commentaries often include in their introductions will here be left for appropriate places in the commentary itself. At this point, as a general introduction to Acts, a few brief words will suffice on such subjects as the nature of the book, its author, date, purpose, context, historical value, and text. 

Acts is a unique book in the entire canon of the New Testament. The books before it, the Gospels, are a literary genre to themselves, perhaps created by the author of Mark. The books after it, the Epistles, follow the accepted structures of the epistolary genre as it was practiced then, abandoning them only when the circumstances and content so require. The Book of Revelation is an example‑certainly the most influential‑of the apocalyptic literature circulating at the time among Jews as well as among Christians. Acts, however, does not fit any of these categories. It is not a gospel, nor an epistle, nor an apocalypse.

It is markedly different from all these other books in that it is a sequel to one of the four Gospels. It does not seem to have occurred to the other three evangelists to follow the narrative of the life and teachings of Jesus with a second book. Because, in the present order of the New Testament, the Gospel of John appears between Luke and Acts, the connection between the two tends to be lost, when in fact Luke and Acts are really the two volumes of a single work. This connection is shown in the dedication of both books to "Theophilus," and in the reference to the "first book" in Acts 1:1.' However, the Gospel of Luke already gives us a hint of its interest in carrying the story of Jesus beyond his resurrection. The other three evangelists do not carry their story beyond the resurrection of Jesus, or at best beyond some final words on the actions and teachings of the Risen Lord. Only the Gospel of Luke tells us of the ascen

The very first words of Acts are "in the first book." This lets us know that this book is not to be read by itself. It is a continuation of the Gospel of Luke, the "the first book" addressed to the same Theophilus to whom this one speaks. What we have here is a two‑part history. The first deals with the acts of Jesus, and the second with the acts of the Spirit after the ascension of Jesus. But Luke does not want us to imagine that these are two completely separate matters. That is why he refers to the subject of his first book as those things that Jesus began to do and to teach. In saying "began," he suggests that this second book, even though it speaks about what took place after the ascension of Jesus, still deals with his ministry, which did not end with the ascension, but rather continues in the work of the Spirit and therefore also in the life of the Church. This second book tells the sequel of what was already told in the first. The acts of the Spirit are a continuation and part of the Gospel.

At the beginning of this second book, Luke feels the need to summarize what he said in the first. He obviously cannot repeat all of it, but rather must find a way to bring it all together under one phrase that will somehow encompass the acts and teachings of Jesus. For Luke, there is no better way to do this than by referring to the message of the reign of God. This is why he tells Theophilus (and now also tells us) that, during the time Jesus spent with his disciples between the resurrection and the ascension, he taught them "about the kingdom of God." Even a rapid reading of the Gospel of Luke will show that the central theme of the teachings of Jesus is the reign of God. Most of the parables refer to it. The good news that merits the message the title of "evangel" is precisely that the reign of God has approached in the person and acts of Jesus (see, for instance, Luke 10:9,11). This subject will be discussed again in the next section (the commentary on 1:4‑8). However, at this point it is important to underscore the significance of the continuity between Luke's two books.

Part of what Luke is telling us is that it is impossible to know Jesus without the intervention of the Holy Spirit. Paul says the same thing in other words: "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" (I Cor. 12:3). Luke indicates this at the beginning of his Gospel by affirming that Mary conceived by action of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35), giving several examples of people who recognize Jesus by the Spirit (Luke 1:41, 2:25‑27), and affirming that the Spirit descended on Jesus at his baptism, at the moment when he was ready to begin his ministry (Luke 3:22).

In order to be a Christian, it is not enough to have grown up among Christians or to belong to a supposedly "Christian" culture. Jesus becomes known to us as Lord and Savior, not merely by human action or inference, but by the work of the Holy Spirit, who employs those human experiences to reveal the true character and power of Jesus. Without the Holy Spirit, it is impossible to be a Christian.

The other significant point here is that the function of the Spirit is to lead people to Jesus. Whatever the Spirit does today, Jesus is doing through the Spirit.

By the Spirit, Jesus continues acting and teaching. That is precisely the subject of the "second book." What the Spirit will teach is not a revelation beyond that which Jesus brought; it is the same as Jesus taught.

Understanding this relationship between Jesus and the Holy Spirit is very important for the Church today. There is among us a common opinion that the revelation of God takes place in three successive stages, each higher than the previous one, so that each excels the other. According to that opinion, first came the revelation of the Father in the Old Testament; then that of the Son in the Gospel; and finally that of the Spirit, in the Church after the ascension of Jesus, and particularly with the contemporary outpouring of charismatic gifts. Such a notion is not new, for similar ideas were held in the second century by the Montanists, and in the Middle Ages by the followers of Joachim of Foire.

The attraction of such opinions for many generations as well as ours is in that it fits well with a certain understanding of "spirituality." For many, "spirituality" consists in leaving behind all that is physical or material. Because Jesus is a physical person, with material flesh and bones, it would seem that "the religion of the Spirit" would be superior to that of Jesus. Such notions, which still challenge the Church today, already were a challenge in New Testament times. That is why in I John 4:2‑3, where it is a matter of testing the spirits, the test is precisely in the relationship between such spirits and the flesh of Jesus: "By this you know the spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus is come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God." The purpose of the entire Book of Acts is to describe the action of the Spirit leading us to the same Jesus who has come in flesh and who, by means of the Spirit, is still active in the Church.

Headline 3

insert content here

WT Main | About WT | Review Links | Contact | Review Sources | Search