13b
Purpose
​
The book of Acts is a narrative about the first three decades of the Christian church, focusing primarily on the missionary activities of Peter and Paul. Alternatively, it can also be said that it is about the missionary activities of the Holy Spirit. On this there is agreement. However, once we pose a deeper question about Luke’s motive or reason for writing the narrative, opinions begin to diverge. Since Luke does not include an explicit purpose statement, reconstructing the original reason for writing has led to a variety of proposals.
​
​
​
Unity of the Early Church
​
Some scholars have argued that Luke wrote Acts to demonstrate that the early Christians lived in harmony with one another and were theologically unified. Why would Luke need to stress this? The most probable reason is that existing divisions and disagreements among Christians or Christian leaders had a negative impact on the audience that Luke was addressing. While there were numerous divisions in the first century among groups that called themselves “Christian” (see Chapter 5), most historians point to the divisions we find in Paul’s letters. For example, in Gal 2:11-14 Paul says that he “opposed Cephas to his face” because he would no longer eat with the Gentiles in the presence of “certain men from James,” who were probably Jewish Christians wanting to maintain ethnic purity laws. In 1 Cor 1:10-17, Paul admonishes the Corinthian Christians for their formation of factions that were identified by their allegiances. Some claimed to “belong to Cephas” and others “to Paul.” In 2 Corinthians, Paul’s adversaries are Jewish Christians who undermine his apostolic authority. Historians have identified some of these Jewish Christians as Judaizers. They were fellow believers in Christ, but vehemently advocated that all Gentile converts to Christianity should keep the Jewish laws and rituals. Paul, of course, saw otherwise.
Apologetic for the Church
​
Unlike any other writings of the New Testament, Acts devotes approximately one quarter of its content to the trials and defenses of Paul in the face of Roman opposition (especially chapters 22-28). This unprecedented emphasis has led several scholars to argue that Acts is an apology (or a reasoned defense) of Christianity to the Romans. While an apology in the ancient world was a genre classification, like the Apology of Socrates, which served as a legal defense for the Athenian officials, it can also be used to refer to a writer’s motive, aim, or purpose. Several genres can contain apologetic purposes. Within the genre confines of ancient historiography, Luke defends the legitimacy and expansion of Christianity most effectively by showing how one Roman official after another endorses Paul’s mission by refusing to stand in the way of the new movement. For example, in 16:35-40 the magistrates of Philippi admit to their wrongful imprisonment of Paul. In 18:12-17, Gallio, the Roman Proconsul of Achaia, allows Paul to publically spread Christianity in the face of Jewish opposition. In 26:31-32, King Agrippa II and the Roman Governor Festus agree that Paul’s spreading of Christianity is not deserving of death or imprisonment, contrary to the insistence of Paul’s Jewish opponents.
​
​
Corinthian Bema (platform of judgment) where Paul
was taken by his Jewish accusers (Acts 18:12-17).
​
​
​
Why would Luke need to defend Christianity to the Romans? The traditional response is that the Romans viewed Oriental religions with skepticism, even fearing that they may be harmful. As a result, Luke attempted to alleviate those fears and suspicions. A more nuanced response is that the Romans were very suspicious of new religions, especially if they originated in the East. As pagans, the Romans were inclusive of religions as long as they did not interfere with or undermine cherished or political rituals and beliefs, such as emperor worship. Generally, the Romans were tolerant of Judaism because it was a very old religion, but they were skeptical about Christianity. Not only was it very new, but it also revered and worshipped a messiah who was crucified, advocated practices that were repugnant, such as the Eucharist (which was mistakenly understood as cannibalism), and in some places opposed paying homage to the emperor’s image. It is likely that some influential Jews played a role in the formation of Roman sentiments, which may explain why Jewish leaders take on an antagonistic role in Acts. Luke counteracts Roman sentiment by showing that Christianity is not only the fulfillment of Judaism through the numerous quotations and allusions to scripture, but is consistent with ideas about God in Greco-Roman literature (Acts 17:22-31). In short, Luke wants to show that since Christianity is rooted in Judaism, and is the completion of Judaism, it should be regarded as an ancient religion and not feared by the Romans.
​
​
Alexamenos Graffito. Anti-Christian graffiti depicting a man with the head of an ass on the cross, 2nd century. The man on the left may be a Christian worshiper. The inscription reads “Alexamenos worships his god.”
Palatine Hill, Rome.
​
​
That Luke is writing an apology has received considerable support, but not everyone sees the aim in the same way. For example, some scholars have speculated that Luke is not writing for a wider Roman audience, but only to Theophilus (1:1) who may have been the Roman magistrate overseeing Paul’s trial in Rome. If this is the case, then Luke-Acts serves as a legal document in defense of Paul. A few have even argued that Luke is not trying to legitimize Christianity to the Romans. Rather, he is trying to legitimize the Romans to Christians. These ideas, however, have not gained much traction.
​
​
​
Confirmation to New Christians
​
In the previous chapter on Luke’s Gospel, one of the identified purposes was the need to assure Gentile Christians that God is faithful. This was especially problematic for former pagans who were accustomed to the fickleness of the gods. The broad Jewish rejection of Jesus as the messiah created a profound problem for thoughtful Gentile Christians. Since the Jews who rejected Jesus were no longer the people of God, Gentile Christians would have wondered if God had abandoned his promise given to Israel through Abraham (Gen 12:1-3). Did God betray his people? Was this God as fickle as their former pagan deities? If God turned away from the Jews, could he not all the more turn away from the Gentiles?
​
​
Roman pantheon in Hadrian’s Temple, 2nd century CE, Ephesus.
​
​
Luke’s two-volume narrative is a response to this anxiety. His posture is resolute. He is intent from the start to “confirm the truth of those things that have been taught” (Luke 1:1-4). What is “the truth” to which he refers? Luke tries to justify the faithfulness of God by showing how events from Jesus to the expansion of the church unfolded consecutively and intentionally. He begins by showing how the revelation of God came to Israel through Jesus, who was destined to be the agent of salvation for the world. Acts continues the story of salvation with the resurrected Christ commissioning his followers to spread the message of Jesus from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” (1:8). It is not surprising that this narrative about the progressive expansion of the gospel ends with Paul preaching “unhindered” in the center of the Roman Empire.
​
Luke attempts to appease the anxiety of the Gentiles by showing that God’s faithfulness extends to both Jews and Gentiles. The problem is not the fickleness of God, but the rejection of his messiah. In both of his volumes, Luke does not shy away from portraying the Jews, especially the Jewish leadership, as rejecting both Jesus (in the Gospel) and his followers (in Acts). In Acts Jewish leaders often play the role of antagonists in Paul’s missionary adventures. This rejection effectively cuts them off from God’s promise of saving the world, originally made to Abraham. Luke sees the acceptance of Jesus among the Gentiles as the fulfillment of God’s promise. As such, Luke has often been regarded as an apologetic historian who saw his writing as the continuation of the biblical story, not so much to defend the Christian movement, but rather to defend God’s consistency throughout history.
​
​
​
Theological Themes
Sovereign Guidance
​
While God’s sovereignty over his world is a core theme in early Jewish and Christian literature, the book of Acts stands apart in its emphasis on the active role of God in Christian mission. From the beginning of the narrative, the apostles are led and empowered by God who is determined to accomplish his objectives. While there is usually synergy between God and the apostles, God’s role is preeminent. The success of the missionary activity is directly credited to his powerful presence operating through his missionaries. In fact, it is so pervasive, that it raises the question whether Luke has in mind a soft form of determinism, which would still allow freedom of choice. For example, God fulfills the scriptures (Luke 1:20; 4:21; 21:24; 22:16; 24:44; Acts 1:16; 3:18; 13:27; 14:26). God determines peoples’ fates (Acts 2:23; 10:42; 13:47; 17:31; 22:10) and has a temporal agenda (Acts 13:47; 17:26). Events happen because they are necessarily determined, such as the replacement of Judas (Acts 1:21-22), initial proclamation to the Jews (Acts 13:46), the persecution of Christians (Acts 14:22), and the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 17:3).
​
One of the main aims of this theme is to comfort Gentile converts who surely would have been perplexed by the events that were unfolding around them, especially trials and suffering. As we discussed in the previous chapter, the evangelization of God-fearers would have required a considerable level of assurance that God is faithful to his promises, unlike the fickle pagan deities. The response that Luke surely wants to instill in his audience is complete trust in God and his plan to save the world.
​
Although there is no developed idea of the Trinity in Acts, the Holy Spirit takes a prominent role. Acts mentions the Holy Spirit some seventy times, more than any other writing in the Bible. After Jesus ascends, his promise to the disciples that they will be baptized in the Holy Spirit (1:5) is realized days later at Pentecost (2:1-4). From that moment on, the Holy Spirit powerfully guides the missionary activities. The Spirit takes an active role in miracles and the conversion of thousands, including Paul in chapter 9. When new Christian communities are established, such as the Samaritans (8:14-25), Cornelius and his fellow Gentiles (10:44-48), and the disciples of the Baptist in Ephesus (19:1-7), the Spirit legitimizes them through outward demonstrations. The Spirit even condemns sinful actions, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (5:1-11).
​
​
Pentecost by Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1311 Museo dell’ Opera del Duomo, Siena.
​
​
The nature of the Holy Spirit is not identified or explained. He is a nameless divine entity manifested in the work of the apostles for the purpose of Christian expansion. It is difficult to know exactly how Luke and his audience understood the Holy Spirit. Since they were primarily influenced by Jewish concepts of God, they probably did not think of him in the same way that Christians did centuries later. Jewish literature from the Second Temple period contains occasional references to the Holy Spirit, not as a deity apart from God or a person alongside the person of the Father, but as the action of Israel’s God who comes in power to initiate restoration and judgment. Questions about Luke’s conception of the Holy Spirit remain. Was he viewed as a manifestation of the one God, an agent of God, a force, or a metaphor? Since Luke was an educated Gentile who formerly converted to Judaism, it is possible that his influence extended beyond Hellenistic Judaism.
​
​
God’s Faithfulness to Israel
In light of our reconstructions of the purpose of Acts, the expansion of Christianity among the Gentiles surely would have raised questions about God’s faithfulness to the Jews. With the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, the broad Jewish rejection of Jesus as the Messiah, the oppressive conduct by Jewish leaders against Christians, and the successful mission to the Gentiles, it is foreseeable that new Gentile converts would have asked, “had God abandoned his former people and turned to the Gentiles?” Luke seems to addresses this kind of question by arguing that God has always been faithful to Israel, his covenant people. Luke declares from the start of the Gospel narrative that God has visited his people with salvation and peace (Luke 1:68), but unfortunately many did not accept it and chose to live in blindness (Luke 19:41-44). He compares them to those who rejected the prophets of old. Luke repeatedly claims that God has been faithful in sending and raising Jesus for the sake of Israel first (Acts 3:20, 26). The consequence of not accepting the coming of God in Christ is exclusion from the people of God. Luke claims that Israel needs to repent for killing yet another prophet, otherwise they cannot share in the promises of God enjoyed by the faithful (Acts 3:11-26). In short, Luke argues that Israel, not God, has been unfaithful.
​
The opposition to Christian mission by the Jewish leadership, in particular, is constant and at times fierce. Some Jewish leaders go so far as to orchestrate violent persecutions against Christians. The most well known, which leads to the first Christian martyrdom, is the stoning of Stephen after he delivers his lengthy message (Acts 7-8). Like the Christian mission, Jewish opposition correspondingly spreads outward from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” (1:8). Paul’s conversion in Acts 9 does little to ease the tensions. If anything, the intensity and frequency increases, especially by synagogue leaders. The last quarter of Acts is almost exclusively taken up with Paul defending himself against the accusations of local Jewish leaders. There is a resounding theme in Paul’s responses. He claims to have complied with Jewish prescriptions and places all of the blame on the Jews.
​
​
Stoning of St. Stephen by Annibale Carracci, 1604.
Musée de Louvre, Paris.
​
​
Yet not all of the Jews in Acts reject Jesus as the Christ. In fact, a considerable number convert to Christianity. In Acts 2:41, three thousand Jews, many of whom are pilgrims who have come to Jerusalem for Passover, are baptized. In Acts 4:4 the total number of converts reaches five thousand, and in 6:7 we are told, “the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem.” When Paul returns to Jerusalem much later in the story, the “brethren” report that thousands of Jews who were “zealous for the law” came to faith in Christ (21:20).
​
The repeated castigations against Jews who do not accept Jesus as the Christ, has drawn criticism among modern scholars that Luke presents an anti-Jewish sentiment that has contributed to later anti-Semitism woven throughout the history of Christianity. Anti-Jewishness or anti-Judaism is a theological position concerning religious teachings and practices. For many early Christians, who were themselves Jewish, they saw these practices as obsolete because they were fulfilled in Christ. Anti-Semitism, on the other hand, is ideologically rooted racism. While none of the New Testament writers can be identified as anti-Semitic, since they are not promoting an agenda of ethnic or religious hatred, it is easy to see how Luke’s Jewish antagonists were appropriated centuries later in the stereotyping of Jewish identity that was clearly hateful.
​
​
Info Box 13.9: Who Decides what is Anti-Jewish in the New Testament?
The designation “anti-Jewish” is a slippery category because it assumes a strict identification of what is meant by “Jewish,” which is not forthcoming any time soon. It depends on who is making the allegation and in what context. If Paul identifies himself as a Jew and yet instructs Gentile converts that they need not be circumcised, is he anti-Jewish? If Luke, who was presumably a Gentile, conveys the same teachings, is he anti-Jewish? In the modern context, if a Jewish person living in Europe advocates for an independent Palestinian nation, is he or she necessarily anti-Jewish? What if the same political view is proposed by a European Muslim? Who decides and what basis? Amy-Jill Levine presents the problem of anti-Jewishness in the New Testament succinctly, writing, “For the church, the New Testament is a book of compassion, of the perfect love called agape, of inclusivity. But many Jews who pick up a copy of the New Testament—in a hotel room, in a hospital, from a missionary on the street corner—find instead a teaching of exclusivity, intolerance, and hate. Still other Jews find the Gospels a message of truth and so accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, while some Christian readers, especially those sensitized to the atrocities carried out in the name of Jesus, will find themselves rejecting some of the New Testament claims. The same book, the same words, can take on profoundly different meanings and make profoundly different impressions.”
(The Misunderstood Jew, 88-89).
​
​
​
The Mission to the Gentiles
The mission to the Gentiles has been sometimes perceived to be a consequence of Israel’s unfaithfulness. Since the Jews heard the gospel first and did not heed it, the Gentiles were offered it instead (Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:25-28). This is not the best way to think about the Gentile mission. Luke was not intending to ostracize the Jews. He was explaining how and why the Christian movement, which was initially Jewish, was becoming increasingly Gentile. There is no indication in Luke’s volumes that God had a change in plans.
​
Also, it should be noted that all of the missionaries who bring the message of salvation to the Gentiles in the book of Acts were Jewish believers. Consequently, the successful mission to the Gentiles was not a replacement of the mission to Israel, but rather an outgrowth or continuation of that mission. The Jewish believers fulfill God’s promise in Isa 49:6 in that they become a light to the Gentiles. In this way then, the Gentiles were offered salvation not because God’s plan for Israel failed, but because it succeeded. Thus, the restoration of Israel was accomplished through the repentance of a faithful remnant.
Old Jewish Cemetery, Prague, established 1439. By the first century CE, it is conceivable that many Jews believed in the resurrection of the dead. The Pharisees were probably the most influential political/religious body that advocated beliefs about the afterlife. Postmortem resurrection became an important topic of dialogue in later rabbinic literature.
​
​
Mamertine Prison cell. Capitoline Hill, Rome. As the only prison in the Roman Forum, it is believed to have been reserved for important prisoners, usually prior to their execution. According to legend, both Paul and Peter were imprisoned here.
​
​
Paul argues that since the hope of the resurrection from the dead is foundational to Judaism, Christian faith, which is rooted in Jesus’ resurrection, should be viewed as the fulfillment of the Jewish hope. The denial of Jesus’ resurrection is tantamount to denying that God can raise the dead and that the “first fruits” of the anticipated final resurrection has begun. Moreover, Paul argues that the acceptance of Jesus’ resurrection does not mean that a Jew cannot remain as a Jew. He points to himself as an example of a believer in Jesus who has not compromised his Judaism. For Gentile converts, however, it does mean that they need not become Jewish in order to gain entrance into the community of the people of God. At the end of Acts, Paul concludes his response to the Jews by associating those who do not believe with the blind and deaf Israelites in Isa 6:9-10 (28:23-28). After the quotation, he summarizes his indictment, saying, “Let it be known to you then that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen.”
​
As we look at all the trials, persecutions, and conflicts with his fellow Jews, Paul emerges as an innocent representative of the Christian movement who is vindicated by both Empire and Torah. Christianity emerges on the right side of history and the Jews who do not accept Christ are not only blamed for the conflicts, but are condemned by their own scriptures. As in other apologetic histories, the protagonists and antagonists are clearly delineated. As Jesus faces his death nobly in the Gospel, so the Christians face their trials, even martyrdom, with boldness. While all of the evangelists warn that followers of Jesus should expect suffering and even death, Luke alone is able to show how this was the case. In addition to Paul’s sufferings, Silas is flogged (16:22), Peter and John are thrown in prison (5:17-18; 12:3-5; 16:23), Stephen is stoned to death (chapter 7), and James is beheaded (12:2). Acts would have undoubtedly provided courage and confidence to Christians who experienced similar trials.
​
​
​
Centrality of Jerusalem: The New Beginning
​
Jerusalem plays a central role in Luke-Acts. It is the location of transition from tragedy to a new beginning. In Luke’s Gospel the entire narrative moves deliberately and slowly toward Jerusalem. Unlike Mark and Matthew, who describe Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem abruptly, Luke takes ten chapters to narrate the journey. Jesus “sets his face to go to Jerusalem” in 9:51 and finally arrives in chapter 19. While this extended journey contributes to Luke’s broad emphasis on Jerusalem, the purpose is elusive. There is a hint, however, in Luke 13:33-35 where Jesus sorrowfully identifies with Israel’s prophets who were killed in Jerusalem. Like them he brings the message of condemnation and restoration, but knows full well that the precedent associated with the city is his fate. From this vantage point, the extensive journey may be intended to draw attention to an old story of God bringing salvation to the center of Israel.
​
Acts reverses the direction. Jerusalem is no longer the destination, but it is the point of departure. Although salvation came to Jerusalem, it was once more rejected. The place of death and despair now becomes the place of resurrection, ascension, and hope. Why should the salvation pattern reverse? The disciples are told to go out from Jerusalem because it rejects the salvation that has come to its people. As Jesus was rejected, so are his followers. This comes as no surprise to the careful reader of both volumes, since Jesus’ rejection is anticipated in Luke 4 when in Nazareth Jesus announced that the “promised year of the Lord’s favor” has arrived in his coming. The movement from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” in Acts 1:8—which is essentially an evangelistic transition from a Jewish mission to a Gentile one—is arguably programmatic for the plot of Acts.
​
​
The Western Wall, Old Jerusalem. This is a remnant of the western supporting wall that was built during the widening of the Temple Mount by Herod the Great. It is today arguably the most significant site in the Jewish faith.
​
​
Acts begins in Jerusalem with the appearances of Jesus to his disciples over a forty-day period. Jesus instructs the disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they are “baptized in the Holy Spirit,” which dramatically differs from Matthew (26:32; 28:7, 10, 16-17) and Mark (14:28) where the disciples are told to go to Galilee. The apostles in Acts have different expectations than the risen Jesus. They are hopeful that finally Jesus will “restore the kingdom to Israel” (1:6), probably through an apocalyptic event. Jerusalem for them is the ideal place from which God will initiate a new age. Jesus, however, thwarts their hopes of a restored nationalism by telling them that it is not their responsibility to calculate the time. Instead, they are told that they must continue in the ministry, but on a wider scale, namely to the “ends of the earth.” Theirs is not to be a political mission, but something far greater, namely the salvation of the world.
​
​
Model of pre-70 CE Jerusalem.
​
​
Jerusalem is also the place where the church begins. The election of Matthias as the twelfth apostle plays an important role in the establishment of the church. Although Peter and Paul are the primary characters—with Matthias playing no role in the rest of the story—the “twelve” not only constitute a new people of God patterned after the twelve tribes of Israel, but also maintain continuity with Jesus’ original election of the twelve. After the election of Matthias in Jerusalem, the Holy Spirit that comes upon the believers is later declared by Peter to have been sent by Jesus. The continuity is verified by supernatural phenomena and the foundation of the church is established. From that moment on, the group is unified and empowered to be the new people of God. Jerusalem never loses its importance in Acts. Despite the success of the Gentile mission and much of the narrative unfolding outside of Judea, the missionaries (i.e. Philip, Peter, and Paul) report back to Jerusalem, which serves as the central location for the nascent movement.
​
​
​
Absence and Presence of Jesus
With the ascension of Jesus at the beginning of the story, the disciples find themselves as no longer followers, but leaders of a new movement. Their situation becomes drastically different. They are alone. Yet, Jesus is not totally absent. He appears to people in visions (Acts 9:3-5), even though he is located in heaven at the right hand of the Father (3:20-21; 7:55-56). In the three-tiered cosmological structure of antiquity, Jesus is above the earth, but can travel back and forth at will. Moreover, his absence is only temporary. Luke, like other early Christian writers, is convinced that Jesus will return to restore (Acts 3:19-21) and judge all humanity (Acts 10:42; 17:30-31). In the interim, Jesus’ ongoing presence is experienced in several ways, which highlight the interconnection between the physical and heavenly realms.
​
First, Jesus is present through the logos (“word”) of God. The logos in Acts is different from that of John’s prologue where it is the personification of wisdom that becomes incarnate. In Acts, it is the proclaimed gospel that God has sent his messiah into the world and vindicated him through resurrection and ascension. Through Jesus, God has established a restored people of God as promised through the prophets of old. The logos is sent to people for their salvation (Acts 13:26). The acceptance of the logos (which calls for faithfulness, repentance, and baptism) is the acceptance of Christ and the incorporation into the new people of God (Acts 8:14; 11:1).
​
Second, Jesus continues to be present in the world through his followers. The activities of the apostles are the activities of Jesus. When they teach, preach, or heal people, the reader is made aware that it is Christ ministering through them (Acts 9:34). Similarly, when his followers are persecuted, Jesus is also persecuted (Acts 9:5). The connection is deeper than a mere representation. It has a kind of equivocation. Unfortunately, Luke does not develop this in detail. A helpful entry into this mysterious relationship is found in those passages where certain apostolic actions have heavenly results, such as John 20:23; Matt 6:14-15 and Acts 3:19.
​
Third, Jesus remains present in the world through his name. People call on the name of Jesus (Acts 22:16), have faith in his name (Acts 3:16), and receive salvation (Acts 4:12) and forgiveness of sins in his name (Acts 10:43). Like today, the name in antiquity functioned in a representative capacity. It served as the symbol that pointed to a person who was not physically present. In the Greco-Roman context, the name of a governor or emperor conveyed his power and authority even when he was absent. In the Jewish scripture the name “God” (e.g. “Yahweh”) conveyed his presence in the temple, while he resided in heaven (e.g. 1 Kings 5:5).
​
Finally, Jesus remains present through the Holy Spirit. In addition to what has already been said above and in the previous chapter, the Holy Spirit functions as a link between Jesus who is in heaven and the apostles. Through the empowering of the Spirit, the apostles bear witness to the glorified Christ and continue the ministry he began in Galilee. At one point the Holy Spirit is equated with the spirit Jesus (16:6-7). The Spirit also guides the life of the church (8:29; 10:19; 11:28; 13:2; 15:28; 16:6; 20:23; 21:11), which takes on the visible presence of Jesus in the world (Acts 1:8; 4:8; 7:55).
​
​
Please note, there is no practice quiz for this chapter at this time.
​
​
Bibliography
Borgman, P. The Way According to Luke: Hearing the Whole Story of Luke-Acts. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.
​
Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles. Hermeneia. Translated by J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, and D. H. Juel.. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.
​
Crossan, J. D. and J. L. Reed. In Search of Paul: How Jesus’ Apostle Opposed Rome’s Empire with God’s Kingdom. A New Vision of Paul’s Words and World. New York: HarperCollins, 2004.
​
Dunn, J. D. G. The Acts of the Apostles. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996.
​
Fitzmyer, J. The Acts of the Apostles. Anchor Bible 31. New York: Doubleday, 1998.
Gill, D. W. J. and C. Gempf, eds. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 2: Graeco-Roman Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
​
Hengel, M. Acts and the History of the Earliest Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.
​
Keck, L. E. and J. L. Martyn, eds. Studies in Luke-Acts. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.
​
Levine, A. –J. The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006.
​
Levinskaya, I. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 5: Diaspora Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
​
Marguerat, D. The First Christian Historian: Writing the 'Acts of the Apostles'. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
​
Ong, W. J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. 30th Anniversary Edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2002.
​
Pervo, R. I. Acts: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009.
​
Powell, M. A. What Are They Saying About Acts? New York: Paulist Press, 1991.
​
Robbins, V. K. “The We Passages in Acts and Ancient Sea Voyages.” Biblical Research 20 (1975) 5-18.
​
Shillington, V. G. An Introduction to the Study of Luke-Acts. Harrisburg, PA:Trinity Press International, 2007.
​
Soards, M. L. The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.
​
Sterling, G. E. Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts, and Apologetic Historiography. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
​
Talbert, C. H. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.
​
Winter, B. W. and A. D. Clark, eds. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 1: Ancient Literary Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
​
​
​