THE WITNESS OF ACTS TO THE KERYGMA

Virgil Warren, PhD PDF

THE WITNESS OF ACTS TO THE KERYGMA

Virgil Warren, PhD

Introduction

Theories about an evolutionary origin for the Christian religion present a fundamental line of inquiry. The body of literature called the “New Testament” supposedly shows stages that process passed through. If the New Testament does not actually represent the original Christian preaching, what really did comprise their message, and how can we recover that primitive gospel?

Acts of Apostles, written after the life of Jesus of Nazareth, presupposes incidents in his ministry. It purports to be a history of men divinely appointed to establish a religion based on these incidents. The record of their “acts” includes accounts of what they said as well. Such a record should prove valuable in discovering the content of the earliest “preaching,” the kerygma.

The issue of origins calls for inquiring into the ramifications of supposing that the Christian gospel evolved from people rather than came from God. Next, the degree of doctrinal consistency of New Testament writers who appear in The Acts calls for examination. Finally, we can compare the kerygmatic elements in The Acts with the writings of these messengers to determine the historicity of The Acts’ witness to the keryma.

We feel free to believe only what is true. When critics cast reflections on what we believe, we feel a need to look into their reasons for doubt. To maintain our equilibrium amid challenges to our hope, we must cope with theories that would destroy its veracity. This study cannot address the whole New Testament’s witness to the apostolic preaching; so it examines Acts of Apostles and compares it briefly with epistles of Peter, Paul, and James.

Problem and Circumstance

Kerygma transliterates a Greek word for “proclamation.” Long ago C. H. Dodd defined what the English term means in the evolutionary model for Christian origins:

“. . . the kerygma consists of the announcement of certain historical events in a setting which displays the significance of the events. The events in question are those of the appearance of Jesus in history—his ministry, suffering, and death, and His subsequent manifestation of Himself to His followers as risen from the dead and invested with the glory of another world—and the emergence of the Church as a society distinguished by the power and activity of the Holy Spirit, and looking forward to the return of its Lord as Judge and Savior of the world.”¹

The content of the kerygma consists of events and their significance. Certain occurrences in the ministry of Jesus are the events; the significance of those events relates to Old Testament references that connected with Jesus’ coming, his death, resurrection, and related events as fulfillments of Old Testament prophecies.

When scholars speak of searching for the kerygma, they imply certain things about the situation they are investigating:

(a) there either are contradictions between the subject matter of various New

Testament writers, or

(b) though in general agreement, the various epistles do not give a reliable

representation of the kerygma.

(d) From the writing of the New Testament until the present, the world has not

known the kerygma.

(e) The New Testament is an example of evolution, not revelation; hence, it is not

inspired or even reliable.

(f) The kerygma itself is not necessarily true.

(g) Scholarly quest for the kerygma is largely an academic pursuit.

If the Christian gospel arose in evolutionary fashion, we wonder about the propriety of even talking about the kerygma. What point along the line of development should we call the kerygma? How original is original? Besides time, what about place and person? If differences existed between authors in latter stages, differences could have existed also in primitive stages. Whether we can call Peter’s or Paul’s preaching a kerygma may be questionable since these men’s lives spanned several decades. That allows for their own views to develop. So, what preaching, by whom, at what time in their lives can be called the kerygma?

To find the kerygma, scholars attempt to overcome the problem of different persons’ preaching by using only what is common to more than one New Testament author. Another technique uses Old Testament prophecies in the earliest proclamation. The preachers cite those predictions to place significance on certain events they believed—or at least preached—as occurring in Jesus’ life. Fifteen prophecies are used in whole or in part by more than one New Testament writer.²

Collecting Old Testament passages that different authors used to prove a common contention gives rise to another theory: there were “testimonia” that New Testament authors used when they wrote—collections of Old Testament passages taken as Messianic. These may have been used in place of the Old Testament writings themselves as a basis for preaching the Christian message.

The main evidence for “testimonia” is that Cyprian (death A.D. 258) had just such a collection later. Secondly, New Testament phenomena lend credence to the theory: (1) certain passages are quoted by more than one writer; (2) when these passages are quoted, there are agreements in a reading different from that of the Septuagint or any other known translation or Hebrew form of the Old Testament text; (3) certain passages tend to appear in combination in more than one New Testament writing; (4) groups of passages recur that are connected by a key word or idea.³ These evidences become reasons for assuming that such testimonia existed earlier than Cyprian’s time, but the chief purpose is to account for the fact that New Testament writers interpret certain Old Testament passages the same way. Such a reconstruction attempts to sidestep belief in inspiration as an explanation for the origin of the Christian message. “Testimonia” account for one fact even as special sources are postulated to explain common features across the synoptic gospels.

(a) God made promises to his people that came to pass hundreds of years later in his Son. (b) Jesus came into this world and performed certain deeds. (c) These acts were understood in terms of prophecies about the Messiah. These three steps by believers are stretched out in the evolutionary hypothesis:

(1) Centuries of speculation gave rise to a hope among the Israelites that there would be a Savior for their nation; these convictions were put into written form.

(2) Jesus of Nazareth was a gifted teacher and leader who, though performing nothing extraordinary, made such an impression that miracle tales and legends grew up around his deeds.

(3) A group of misled disciples began to attach to his deeds those prophecies so long held dear by Israelites. Those interpretations evolved further until the promises were collected and arranged systematically for facility in convincing Jews about Jesus’ Messiahship. Such collections became the reference books for those who wrote the New Testament, each writer evidencing his own theological structure atop this common foundation.

(4) Through such activity a society of expanding, theologically evolving believers developed.

That process, however, needs too much time to be practical in the short space from A.D. 30 to approximately A.D. 61, when Acts of Apostles was penned. The penchant for sources and systems has led theorists to such complexities that, although individual parts of the schematic seem plausible, the whole is not persuasive. No amount of extensive evolution can account for the phenomena the theory tries to explain. The plausibility of any explanation depends on how well the whole coincides with the facts. In agreement with this observation is the practice of such scholars to re-date the New Testament books that have come down to us and put them at a much later time and thereby detach them from the writers historically identified with them.

The likelihood of the “testimonia theory” bears examination. Common material in more than one author can have various explanations; consequently, saying that the common material constitutes the kerygma is superficial. (1) Rather than being the kerygma, the common material could be the basis for everything else and therefore received emphasis appropriate to its importance in the early preaching. Basic elements would get repeated more frequently, but that does not necessarily call for their position in the original kerygma to the exclusion of other parts of the message. (2) Rather than being the center from which all else radiated, the common matter could represent the beginning of a later synthesis, since Pauline and Petrine theologies have been the thesis and antithesis that synthesized in Roman Catholicism. (3) The further developments built on these facts may also be part of the original preaching but not stressed so much in The Acts because the elements on which they were based must first have been accepted; hence, the content of a given proclamation depends on which rung of the ladder the hearer is standing. When Paul spoke on the Areopagus, he began with the God unknown to the Athenians before he announced the resurrection of that God’s Son and the judgment to come. Peter, speaking on Pentecost, started with Old Testament prophets accepted by the devout Jews gathered in Jerusalem from every nation under heaven. At the Conference on Circumcision, James assumes that everyone present believed that his physical half-brother was the prophesied, crucified, risen, glorified sovereign of the universe. The stage of the preaching’s development may be as much determined by the progress of the hearers as by the progress of the speaker.

From the emphasis put by liberal theologians on New Testament use of Old Testament prophecy, they imply that solving the content of the kerygma lies in the use of the Old Testament. That idea leads to the understanding of fulfillment prevalent in the primitive church. Then, if fulfillment is understood, the naturalistic explanation of Christian origins is very near.

The above procedure is not altogether wrong; it just misconstrues the elements of the process. The mistake comes from supposing that only what is common to the writers constitutes the kerygma. That assumption grows out of the further assumption that, because the writers use different language to explain additional elements, they contradict one another, or that, because one omits something another adds, they have different theologies. Such theorizing draws many conclusions about an author’s theology from his emphasis on certain parts of that theology, forgetting, it seems, that his writings give instruction on issues pertinent to his readers; they are not position papers for setting forth his views for the first time. To say that further progress of the preaching appears in a certain writing or that common material represents original kerygma disregards time, place, and circumstance.

Integrity of The Acts

In the context of an evolutionary background for the Christian faith, two theories about Acts of the Apostles undermine its reliability. First are source theories; second is the speculation that The Acts was written to cover up a dissension between Peter and Paul. Together these claims subtract from the book any real historicity.

That Peter and Paul were in disagreement grows out of Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:11ff about rebuking Peter in Antioch: earlier Peter had separated himself from the Gentile converts when some Jews arrived, supposedly sent by the Jerusalem church. That conclusion about divergence in message stands at odds with Peter’s own words in his second letter: “. . . even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you” (3:15). Some people Peter was writing to were the same ones addressed by the Galatian letter. Of course, this combination of texts does not amount to much if a person denies that Peter wrote the second letter that bears his name. The dissimulation in Antioch was not about doctrine but about living out its implications. Peter’s experience in the Cornelius event appears in the same Book of Acts and shows that Peter understood better than he acted later (Acts 10:34-35). Galatians 2:14 itself shows that Paul and Peter did not disagree on the kerygma:

“When I say that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of everyone, ‘If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you are trying to compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?’”

The descension was not about the message but about Peter’s cowardice in not standing up to the Judaizers. It was not a disagreement between Paul and Peter; it was a conflict in Peter between what he believed and what he was doing.

The theory about Peter and Paul’s enmity connects with whether the speeches of The Acts are historical accounts of actual addresses or were composed by Luke and inserted at appropriate places and at regular intervals according to the practice of some Greek historians. In response to this possibility, the chart laid out as Addendum A analyzes doctrinal elements of speeches in The Acts. For details of that meticulous analysis, consult that chart.

Some results of the chart appear here about elements of the early preaching that The Acts records. This analysis identifies eleven gospel features in Paul’s speeches. Ten of these elements figure prominently in his epistles:

(1) Jesus resurrected (1 Corinthians 15:12);

(2) Jesus appeared after his death (1 Corinthians 15:5-8);

(3) Jesus is judge (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10);

(4) Jesus is the Christ (1 Corinthians 1:1);

(6) Baptism is commanded (Romans 6:4);

(5) Repentance is commanded (Romans 2:4);

(7) Remission of sins is promised (1 Corinthians 15:3);

(8) Salvation is given to the Jews (Romans 1:16);

(9) The gospel is universal (Romans 10:12);

(10) Paul witnessed the resurrected Christ (1 Corinthians 15:8).

Besides the elements in Paul’s speeches, most of the other elements also appear:

(1) The present generation is sinful (Romans 5:8);

(2) Christ’s sufferings were prophesied (1 Corinthians 15:3);

(3) Christ’s resurrection was prophesied (1 Corinthians 15:4);

(4) Christ’s deity is proclaimed (2 Corinthians 1:2);

(5) Jesus was innocent of the charges for which he was executed (Romans 10:4);

(6) Jews killed Jesus (1 Thessalonians 2: 14-15);

(7) Jesus was killed on a tree (1 Corinthians 2:8);

(8) Jesus ascended to heaven (Ephesians 4:10);

(9) Jesus is now exalted (Philippians 2:8);

(10) Jesus is seated on a throne (1 Corinthians 15:25);

(11) Jesus’ Parousia will occur (1 Corinthians 15:3);

(12) His disciples act by his authority and power (Galatians 1:1);

(13) Rewards are promised (Romans 1:9);

(14) The Spirit is given (2 Corinthians 2:5);

(15) Charismatic gifts were given (1 Corinthians 12-14);

(16) There is a final resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-21);

(17) The deity of Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:19);

(18) The Law of Moses is not binding on Christians (Galatians 3:23-29).

All these teachings appear multiple times in Paul’s letters, but only one reference per doctrine is given here.

Five elements in the speeches of The Acts are not expressly given in Paul’s letters:

(1) A savior was prophesied for Israel;

(2) The use of Psalm 16:10;

(3) Jews rejected Jesus;

(4) Christ’s ascension was prophesied;

(5) Jesus’ body saw no corruption.

Peter’s speeches contain all the gospel elements except a statement about the final resurrection. In his two letters, he speaks of a majority of these matters as well:

(1) The sinfulness of mankind (1 Peter 4:34);

(2) A savior prophesied to Israel (1 Peter 1:10-11);

(3) Christ’s sufferings having been prophesied (1 Peter 1:11);

(4) Christ’s divinity (1 Peter 1:3);

(5) Jesus’ innocence (1 Peter 2:22-23);

(6) Jesus’ being killed on a tree (1 Peter 2:24);

(7) Jesus’ resurrection (1 Peter 1:3, 21);

(8) Jesus’ ascension (1 Peter 3:22);

(9) Jesus’ exaltation (1 Peter 3:22);

(10) Jesus’ ruling on a throne (1 Peter 3:22)

(11) Jesus’ parousia (1 Peter 1:13);

(12) Jesus as judge (1 Peter 4:5-6);

(13) Jesus’ deity (1 Peter 1:3);

(14) Jesus as the Christ (1 Peter 1:1);

(15) The disciples’ acting by Christ’s power (2 Peter 1:1);

(16) Repentance being commanded (2 Peter 3:9);

(17) Baptism commanded (1 Peter 4:3);

(18) Rewards are promised (1 Peter 1:40;

(19) Charismatic gifts were given (1 Peter 4:10-11);

(20) Salvation to the Jews (1 Peter 1:12);

(21) The universal gospel (2 Peter 3:9);

(22) The witnesses of Jesus (2 Peter 1:18).

James’ short comments at the Conference on Circumcision mention final resurrection, salvation for Jews, and not binding the Law on Gentile Christians. In his epistle, James mentions none of these, but he does speak of the following:

(1) The deity of Christ (1:1);

(2) The sinfulness of humankind (2:7);

(3) The innocence of Jesus (5:6);

(4) The Jews’ killing of Jesus (5:6);

(5) Jesus’ Parousia (5:7-8);

(6) Jesus as judge (5:9);

(7) Jesus as deity (2:1);

(8) Jesus as the Christ (1:1);

(9) Rewards (2:5).

James, Paul, and Peter are the only Christian speakers in The Acts who have left written records to compare with what they say in The Acts. All the things spoken by them in The Acts are not necessarily in their epistles, and their letters contain many elements that were not spoken by them in The Acts. These records, doctrinally speaking, are compatible because where they overlap they agree.

Some of the gospel elements, although lacking in the speeches, find a place in the narrative sections; for example:

(1) Breaking of bread—communion (2:42);

(2) Prayer (2:42);

(3) Proper attitude toward possessions (4:32);

(4) Communion observance on the first day of the week (20:7);

(5) The local churches had a group of elders (20:17).

These observations show there is no need to suppose that The Acts was written to cover up dissension between Peter and Paul, since the gospel elements attributed to these men in The Acts agree with what we can know from their writings. If there were differences between Peter and Paul, those variations lie outside of the elements common to The Acts, the epistles of Paul, and the epistles of Peter; hence, Acts of the Apostles itself furnishes no reason to think their theologies were incompatible.

The following examples illustrate the variation possible when even the same author is telling an event.

A Statement by John the Baptist

Acts 13:25 Luke 3:16

(ἀλλ’) ἔρχεται ἔρχεται

ἀλλ’ δὲ

ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου

οὗ οὗ

οὐκ οὐκ

εἰμὶ εἰμὶ

ἄξιος ἱκανὸς

λῦσαι λῦσαι

τὸν ἱμάντα

τὸ τῶν

ὑπόδημα ὑποδημάτων

τῶν ποδῶν (λῦσαι).

αὐτοῦ.

Accounts of Paul’s Conversion

Acts 26:9-18 9:1-22 22:3-16

3. Ἐγώ εἰμι ἀνὴρ Ἰουδαῖος, γεγεννη-μένος ἐν Τάρσῳ τῆς Κιλικίας, ἀνατεθραμμένος δὲ ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύ-

τῃ, παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιήλ, πεπαιδευμένος κατὰ ἀκρίβειαν τοῦ πατρῴου νόμου, ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τοῦ θεοῦ καθὼς πάντες ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ σήμερον,

9. Ἐγὼ 1. ὁ δὲ Σαῦλος

μὲν οὖν ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ πρὸς

τὸ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου

δεῖν πολλὰ ἐναντία πράξαι^.

10. ὃ καὶ ἐποίησα ἐν

Ἱεροσολύμοις,

καὶ πολλούς τε τῶν ἁγίων ἔτι ἐμπνέων ἀπειλῆς καὶ

ἐγὼ ἐν

φυλακαῖς κατέλεισα φόνου εἰς τοὺς μαθητὰς

τοῦ κυρίου,

τὴν παρὰ τῶν ἀρχιερέων

ἐξουσίαν λαβῶν ἀναιρου-

μένων τε αὐτῶν κατήνεγκα

ψῆφον. 11. καὶ κατὰ πάσας

τὰς συναγωγὰς πολλάκις

τιμωρῶν αὐτοὺς ἠνάγκαζον

βλασφημεῖν, περισσῶς τε

ἐμμαινόμενος αὐτοῖς

προσελθὼν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ 5. ὡς καὶ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς μαρτυρεῖ μοι

καὶ πᾶν τὸ πρεσβυτέριον,

2. ῂτήσατο παρ’αὐτοῦ παρ’ ᾧν καὶ ἐπιστολὰς δεξάμενος

ἐπιστολὰς πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς

ἐδίωκον

ἕως καὶ εἰς τὰς ἔξω πόλεις. εἰς Δαμασκὸν εἰς Δαμασκὸν

πρὸς τὰς συναγωηάς, ὅπως

ἐάν τινας εὕρῃ τῆς ὄντας,

ἐπορευόμην, ἄξων καὶ τοὺς ἐκεῖσε

ὄντας δεδεμένους εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ

ἵνα τιμωρηθῶσιν.

ἄνδρας τε καὶ γυναῖκας, 4. ὃς ταύτην τὴν ὁδὸν ἐδίωξα ἄχρι

δεδεμένους ἀγάγῃ εἰς θανάτου, δεσμεύων καὶ παραδιδοὺς

Ἰεροσαλήμ. εἰς φυλακὰς ἄνδρας τε καὶ γυναῖκας,

12. ἐν οἷς 6. ἐγένετο

3. δὲ δέ

πορευόμενος ἐν (δὲ) τῷ πορεύεσθαι μοι πορευομένῳ

καὶ

ἐγένετο αὐτὸν ἐγγίζειν ἐγγίζοντι

εἰς

τὴν τῇ τῇ

Δαμασκὸν Δαμασκῷ Δαμασκῷ

μετ’ ἐξουσίας καὶ ἐπιτροπῆς

τῆς τῶν ἀρχιερέων

ἐξαίφνης ἐξαίφνης

τε

13. ἡμέρας μέσης περὶ μεσημβρίαν

κατὰ τὴν ὁδὸν εἶδον, βασιλεῦ,

οὐρανόθεν ὑπὲρ τὴν λαμ- αὐτὸν περιήστραψεν φῶς (ἐξαίφνης) ἐκ τοὺ οὺρανοὺ περι-

πρότητα τοῦ ἡλίου περι- ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, αστράψαι φῶς ἱκνὸν περὶ ἐμέ,

λάμψαν με φῶς

καὶ τοὺς σὺν ἐμοὶ πορευομένους:

14. πάντων τε καταπε- 4. καὶ πέσων ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν 7. ἔπεσά τε εἰς τὸ ἔδαφος

σόντων ἡμῶν εἰς τὴν γῆν

ἤκουσα φωνὴν λέγουσαν ἤκουσεν φωνὴν λέγουσαν καὶ ἤκουσα φωνῆς λεγούσης μοι,

πρός με αὐτῷ

τῇ Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ

Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί με διώκεις; Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί με διώκεις; Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί με διώκεις;

σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα

λακτίζειν.

15. Ἐγὼ 8. ἐγὼ

δὲ 5. δὲ δὲ

εἶπα εἶπεν (δὲ) ἀπεκρίθην,

τίς εἶ, κύριε; τίς εἶ, κύριε; Τίς εἶ, κύριε;

ὁ ὁ

δὲ δὲ, τε

κύριος

εἶπεν εἶπέν (τε)

πρός με,

Ἐγώ εἰμι Ἰησοῦς Ἐγώ εἰμι Ἰησοῦς Ἐγώ εἰμι Ἰησοῦς

ὁ Ναζωραῖος,

ὃν σὺ διώκεις^. ὃν σὺ διώκεις^. ὃν σὺ διώκεις^.

9. οἱ δὲ σὺν ἐμοὶ ὄντες τὸ μὲν φῶς

ἐθεάσαντο τὴν δὲ φωὴν οὐκ ἤκου-σαν τοῦ λαλοῦντός μοι.

10. εἶπον δέ, Τί ποιήσω, κύριε; ὁ δὲ κύριος εἶπεν πρός με,

ἀλλὰ 6. ἀλλὰ

ἀνάστηθι ἀνάστηθι Ἀναστὰς

καὶ στῆθι ἐπὶ τοὺς πόδας σου^.

καὶ

εἴσελθε πορεύου

εἰς εἰς

τὴν πόλιν, Δαμασκόν,

καὶ κἀκεῖ

σοὶ σοι

λαληθήσεταί (σοι) λαληθήσεται

ὅ τι περὶ πάντων ὧν

δεῖ τέτακταί

σε (δεῖ) σοι

ποιεῖν ποιῆσαι.

7. οἱ δὲ 9. οἱ δὲ

ἄνδρες οἱ συνοδεύοντες σὺν (ἐμοὶ) ὄντες

αὐτῷ ἐμοὶ

εἱστήκεισαν ἐνεοί,

τὸ μὲν φῶς ἐθεάσαντο

τῆς τὴν

δὲ

φωνῆς φωνὴν

οὐκ

ἀκούοντες ἤκουσαν

μὲν (τὴν φωνῆς)

τοῦ λαλοῦντός μοι.

μηδένα δὲ θεωροῦντες.

8. ἠγέρθη δὲ Σαῦλος ἀπὸ

τῆς γῆς, ἀνεῳγμένων δὲ

τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτοῦ

11. ὡς δὲ

οὐδὲν οὐκ

ἔβλεπεν^. ἐνέβλεπον

ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης τοῦ φωτὸς ἐκείνου,

χειραγωγοῦντες χειραγωγούμενος

δὲ αὐτὸν

ὑπὸ τῶν συνόντων μοι

εἰσήγαγον ἦλθον

εἰς Δαμασκόν. εἰς Δαμασκόν.

9. καὶ ἦν ἡμέρας τρεῖς μὴ βλέπων,

καὶ οὐκ ἔφαγεν οὐδὲ ἔπιεν.

10. Ἦν δέ τις μαθητὴς ἐν Δαμασκῷ

ὀνόματι Ἁνανίας, καὶ εἶπεν

πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν ὁράματι ὁ κύριος

Ἁνανία. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν. Ἰδοὺ ἐγώ, κύριε.

11. ὁ δὲ κύριος πρὸς αὐτόν,

Ἀνάστα πορεύθητι ἐπὶ τὴν ῥύμην

τὴν καλουμένην Ἐυδεῖαν καὶ ζήτησον

ἐν οἰκίᾳ Ἰούδα Σαῦλον ὀνόματι

Ταρσέα^. ἰδοὺ γὰρ προσεύχεται

12 καὶ εἶδεν ἄνδρα [ἐν ὁράματι]

Ἁνανίαν ὀνόματι εἰσελθόντα καὶ

ἐπιθέντα αὐτῷ [τὰς] χεῖρας ὅπως

ἀναβλέψῃ. 13. ἀπεκρίθη δὲ Ἁνανίας,

Κύριε, ἤκουσα ἀπὸ πολλῶν περὶ τοῦ

ἀνδρὸς τούτου ὅσα κακὰ τοῖς ἁγίοις

σου ἐποίησεν ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ^. 14. καὶ

ὧδε ἔχει ἐξουσίαν παρὰ τῶν ἀρχιερέων

δῆσαι πάντας τοὺς ἐπικαλουμένους τὸ

ὄνομά σου. 15. Εῖπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν

ὁ κύριος, Πορεύου, ὅτι σκεῦος

ἐκλογῆς ἐστίν μοι οὗτος τοῦ

βαστάσαι τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐνώπιον

ἐθνων τε καὶ βασιλέων υἱῶν τε Ἰσραὴλ^.

16. ἐγὼ γὰρ ὑποδείξω αὐτῷ ὅσα δεῖ

αὐτὸν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματός μου παθεῖν.

εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ ὤφθην σοι,

προχειρίσασθαι σε ὑπηρέτην

καὶ μάρτυρα ὧν τε εἶδές [με]

ὧν τε ὀφθήσομαί σοι,

17. ἐξαιρούμενός σε ἐκ τοῦ

λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, εἰς

οὓς ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω σε 18.

ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, τοῦ

ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπὸ σκότους εἰς

φῶς καὶ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ

Σατανᾶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, τοὺ

λαβεῖν αὐτοὺς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν

καὶ κλῆρον ἐν τοῑς ἠγιασμένοις

πίστει τῇ εἰς ἐμέ.

17. Ἀπῆλθεν δὲ Ἁνανίας 12. Ἁνανίας δέ τις, ἀνὴρ εὐλαβὴς

κατὰ τὸ νόμον, μαρτυρούμενος ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν κατοικούντων Ἰουδαί-ων,

καὶ εἰσῆλθεν 13. ἐλθών

εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν πρὸς ἐμὲ

καὶ ἐπιθεὶς ἐπ’αὐτὸν τᾶς καὶ ἐπιστὰς

χεῖρας

εἶπεν εἶπέν

μοι

Σαοὺλ ἀδελφέ, Σαοὺλ ἀδελφέ,

ὁ κύριος ἀπέσταλκέν με,

Ἰησοῦς ὁ ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τῇ

ὁδῷ ᾗ ἤρχου, ὅπως

ἀναβλέπῃς ἀνάβλεψον^.

καὶ πλησθῆς πνεύματος

ἁγίου.

18. καὶ κἀγὼ

εὐθέως αὕτῃ τῃ ὥρᾳ

ἀπέπεσαν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν

ὀφθαλμῶν ὡς λεπίδες,

ἀνέβλεψέν ἀνέβλεψα

τε

εἰς αὐτόν.

14. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, Ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων

ἡμῶν προεχειρίσατό σε γνῶναι τὸ

θέλημα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἰδεῖν τὸν δίκαιον καὶ ἀκοῦσαι φωνὴν ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ. 15. ὄτι ἔσῃ μάρτυς αὐτῷ πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὧν ἑώρακας καὶ ἤκουσας.

καὶ 16. καὶ

νῦν τί μέλλεις;

ἀναστὰς ἀναστὰς

ἐβαπτίσθη βάπτισαι

καὶ ἀπόλυσαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου

ἐπικαλεσάμενος τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

19. καὶ λαβὼν τροφὴν

ἐνισχύθη.

Accounts of the Conversion of Cornelius

Acts 10:9-27 11:5-12

9. Τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ὁδοιπορούντων

ἐκείνων καὶ τῇ πόλει ἐγγιζόντων

5. Ἐγὼ ἠμὴν ἐν τόλει Ἰόππῃ

ἀνέβη Πέτρος ἐπὶ τὸ δῶμα

προσεύξασθαι προσευχόμενος

περὶ ὥραν ἔκτην.

10. ἐγένετο δὲ πρόσπεινος καὶ

ἤθελεν γεύσασθαι^. παρασκευα-

ζόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἐγένετο ἐπ’αὐτὸν

ἔκστασις.

11. καὶ καὶ

θεωρεῖ εἶδον

ἐν ἐκστάσει ὅραμα,

τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀεῳγμένον καὶ

καταβαῖνον σκεῦός τι ὡς καταβαῖνον σκεῦός τι ὡς

ὀθόνην μεγάλην ὀθόνην μεγάλην

τέσσαρσιν ἀρχαῖς καθιέμενον τέσσαρσιν ἀρχαῖς καθιεμένην

ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ,

ἐπὶ τὴς γῆς,

καὶ ἦλθεν ἄχρι ἐμοῦ^.

12. ἐν 6. εῖς

ῷ ἦν

ἀτενίσας κατενόουν καὶ εἶδον

πάντα τὰ τετράποδα τὰ τετράποδα

τῆς γῆς καὶ τὰ θηρία

καὶ καὶ

τὰ

ἑρπετὰ ἑρπετὰ

τῆς γῆς

καὶ καὶ

τὰ

πετεινὰ τοῦ οῦρανοῦ. πετεινὰ τοῦ οῦρανοῦ^.

13. καὶ δὲ

ἐγένετο ἤκουσα

καὶ

φωνὴ φωνῆς

λεγούσης

πρὸς

αὐτόν, μοι,

Ἀναστάς, Πέτρε, Ἀναστὰς Πέτρε,

θῦσον καὶ φάγε. θῦσον καὶ φάγε.

14. ὁ (δὲ) Πέτρος

εἶπεν εἶπον

δὲ, δέ,

Μηδαμῶς, κύριε, ὅτι Μηδαμῶς, κύριε, ὅτι

(κοινὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον)

οὐδέποτε οὐδέποτε

ἔφαγον εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ στόμα μου

πᾶν

κοινὸν κοινὸν

καὶ ἢ

ἀκάθαρτον. ἀκάθαρτον.

9. ἀπεκρίθη

15. καὶ δὲ

φωνὴ φωνὴ

πάλιν

ἐκ δευτέρου ἐκ δευτέρου

(φωνὴ)

πρὸς αὐτόν,

Ἃ ὀ θεὸς ἐκαθάρισεν σὺ μὴ κοίνου. Ἃ ὁ θεὸς ἐκαθάρισεν σὺ μὴ κοίνου.

16. τοῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τρίς, καὶ 10.τοῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τρίς, καὶ

εὐθὺς

ἀνελήμφθη ἀνεσπάσθη

τὸ σκεῦος

πάλιν

εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν.

17. Ὡς

δὲ 11α. καὶ

ἐν ἑαυτῷ διηπόρει ὁ Πέτρος τί ἂν

εἴη τὸ ὅραμα ὃ εἶδεν.

ἰδοὺ ἰδοὺ

ἐξαυτῆς

οἱ

τρεῖς

ἄνδρες ἄνδρες

οἱ

ἀπεσταλμένοι 11c. ἀπεσταλμένοι

ὑπὸ ἀπὸ

τοῦ

Κορνηλίου Κορνηλίου

Πρός με

διερωτήσαντες τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ

Σίμωνος

ἐπέστησαν ἐπὶ 11b. ἐπέστησαν ἐπὶ

τὸν πυλῶνα,

τὴν οἰκίαν ἐν ᾗ ἦμεν.

καὶ φωνήσαντες ἐπύνθανοντο εἰ

Σίμων ὁ ἐπικαλούμενος ἐνθάδε

ξενίζεται. τοὺ δὲ Πέτρου

διενθυμουμένου περὶ τοῦ ὁράματος

εἶπεν 12. εἶπεν

δὲ

τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ πνεῦμά

μοι

Ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο ζητοῦντές σε.

20. ἀλλὰ ἀναστὰς κατάβηθι καὶ

πορεύου σὺν συνελθεῖν

αὐτοῖς μηδὲν διακρινόμενος, αὐτοῖς μηδὲν διακρινόμενος.

ὅτι ἐγὼ ἀπέσταλκα αὐτούς.

21. καταβὰς δὲ Πέτρος πρὸς τοὺς

ἄνδρας εἶπεν , Ἰδοὺ ἐγώ εἰμι ὃν

ζητεῖτε^. τίς ἡ αἰτία δι’ ἣν πάρεστε;

22. οἰ δὲ εἶπαν, Κορνήλιος

ἑκατοντάρχης, ἀνὴρ δίκαιος καὶ

φοβούμενος τὸν θεὸν μαρτυρούμενός

τε ὑπὸ ὅλου τοῦ ἔθνους τῶν

Ἰουδαίων, ἐχρηματίσθη ὑπὸ ἀγγέλου

ἁγίου μεταπέμψασθαί σε εἰς τὸν οἶκον

αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκοῦσαι ῥήματα παρὰ σοῦ.

23. εἰσκαλεσάμενος οὖν αὐτοὺς ἐξένισεν^.

Τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ἀναστὰς ἐξῆλθεν

σὺν αὐτοῖς.

καί δὲ (ἦλθον σὺν ἐμοὶ)

τινες (καὶ) οὗτοι

(οἱ) ἓξ

τῶν οἱ

ἀδελφῶν ἀδελφοὶ (οὗτοι)

τῶν ἀπὸ Ἰόππης

καὶ

συνῆλθαν ἦλθον σὺν

αὐτῷ ἐμοί.

24. τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὴν

Καισάρειαν. ὁ δὲ Κορνήλιος ἦν

προσδοκῶν συγκαλεσάμενος τοὺς

συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς ἀναγκαίους

φίλους.

25. ὡς δὲ ἐγένετο τοῦ εἰσελθεῖν

τὸν Πέτρον, συναντήσας αὐτῷ ὁ

Κορνήλιος πέσων ἐπὶ τοὺς πόδας

προσεκύνησεν. 26. ὁ δὲ Πέτρος

ἤγειρεν αὐτον λέγων, Ἀνάστηθι

καὶ ἐγὼ αὐτὸς ἄνθρωπός εἰμι.

27. καὶ καὶ

συνομιλῶν αὐτῷ

εἰσῆλθεν εἰσήλθομεν

εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ ἀνδρός.

καὶ εὑρίσκει συνεληλυθότας πόλλους.

Appearance of the Angel to Cornelius

Acts 10:3-6 30-32 11:13-14

13. Ἀπήγγειλεν δὲ ἡμῖν

πῶς

30. Ἀπὸ τετάρτης

ἡμέρας

3b. περὶ μέχρι

ὥραν ἐνάτην ταύτης τῆς ὥρας

(ἤμην) τῆν ἐνάτην

τῆς ἡμέρας

ἤμην προσευχόμενος

3a. εἶδεν ἐν

ὁράματι θανερῶς εἶδεν (τὸν ἄγγελον)

ἐν ἐν

τῷ τῷ

οἴκῳ οἴκῳ

μου, αὐτοῦ

καῖ ἰδοῦ

ὡσεῖ

3c. ἄγγελον ἀνὴρ τὸν ἄγγνελον

τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσ-

ελθόντα πρὸς

αὐτὸν

ἔστη σταθέντα

ἐνώπιόν μου ἐν

ἐσθῆτι λαμπρᾷ

καὶ 31. καὶ καὶ

εἰπόντα φησί, εἰπόντα

αὐτῷ

Κορνήλιε. Κορνήλιε,

4. ὁ δὲ ἀτενίσας

αὐτῷ καὶ ἔμφοβος

γενόμενος εἶπεν

Τί ἐστιν, κύριε;

εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ,

(εἰσηκούσθῃ)(σου)

Αἱ ἠ

προσευχαί προσευχή

σου σου

καὶ καὶ

αἱ αἱ

ἐλεημοσύναι ἐλεημοσύναι

σου σου

ἀνέβησαν εἰσηκούσθη

εἰς μνημοσύνον ἐμνήσθησαν

ἔμπροσθεν ἐνώπιον

τοῦ τοῦ

θεοῦ. θεοῦ.

5. καὶ νῦν

πέμψον 32. πέμψον Ἀπόστειλον

οὖν

ἄνδρας

εἰς εἰς εἰς

Ἰόππην Ἰόππην Ἰόππην

καὶ καὶ καὶ

μετάπεμψαι μετακάλεσαι μετάπεμψαι

Σίμωνά Σίμωνα Σίμωνα

τινα

ὃς ὃς τὸν

ἐπικαλεῖται ἐπικαλεῖται ἐπικαλούμενον

Πέτρος^. Πέτρος^. Πέτρον,

14. ὃς λαλήσει ῥήματα

πρὸς σὲ ἐν οἷς σωθήσῃ

σὺ καὶ πᾶς ὁ οἶκός σου.

6. οὗτος οὗτος

ξενίζεται ξενίζεται

ἐν οἰκίᾳ

παρά τινι

Σίμωνι Σίμωνος

βυρσεὶ, βύρσεως

ᾧ ἐστὶν οἰκία

παρὰ παρὰ

θάλασσαν. θάλασσαν.

A Statement of Jesus

Acts 11:16 1:5

ὅτι

Ἰωάνης Ἰωάνης

μὲν μὲν

ἐβάπτισεν ἐβάπτισεν

ὕδατι ὕδατι

ὑμεῖς ὑμεῖς

δὲ δὲ

βαπτισθήσεσθε βαπτισθήσεσθε

ἐν ἐν

πνεύματι πνεύματι

ἁγίῳ (βαπτισθήσεσθε) ἁγίῳ

οὐ μετὰ πολλὰς ταύτας

ἡμέρας.

Paul’s Outcry Before the Sanhedrin

Acts 23:6 Acts 24:21

Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί,

ἐγὼ Φαρισαῖός εἰμι,

υἱὸς Φαρισαίων

περὶ Περὶ

ἐλπίδος καὶ

ἀναστάσεως ἀναστάσεως

νεκρῶν νεκρῶν

ἐγὼ

κρίνομαι κρίνομαι

σήμερον ἐφ’ὑμῶν.

Luke’s Greek is said to change from Hebraistic to Hellenistic as the scenes of The Acts move from Palestine to Greek territories.¹ That observation, if valid, would tend to authenticate the Book of Acts. We examine that claim to see whether it corresponds with the facts.

If The Acts is divided into parts according to whether the scenes are in Greek or Hebrew territory, it falls into four sections: chapters 1-12, 13-20, 21-26, 27-28. Since written and spoken language may vary greatly, study of style does well to distinguish narrative and dialogue. So the four divisions may subdivide further into narrative, Old Testament quotation, discourse, and speeches. Observations are made on a number-of-words basis. Speeches include the material in the chart of speeches; Old Testament quotation, since it does not contribute to an author’s style, is subtracted from the speeches, discourse, and narrative; discourse includes only the spoken words while the words used in the connectives are numbered in the narrative classification.

Composition of the Book of Acts by Percentage

1-12 13-20 21-26 27-28

Speech 29% 20% 29% 8%

Discourse 12% 15% 31% 14%

Old Testament 8% 2% —— 4%

Narrative 51% 63% 40% 74%

Composition of the Book of Acts by Words

Narrative O. T. Discourse Speeches Total

1-12 3,779 555 900 2136 7,369

13-20 3,432 122 827 1,078 5,459

21-26 1,437 7 1,092 1,032 3.568

27-28 1,003 55 193 101 1,352

1-28 9,650 739 3,012 4,347 17,748

To some extent, the number of participles indicates the Hellenistic or Hebraic tendencies of the author since Hebrew tends toward parataxis while Greek prefers hypertaxis. Participles subordinate thoughts to one another; so the greater number of participles fits with a Hellenistic leaning. The figures result from dividing the number of participles into the number of words. Thus, the lower the figure the more frequent the participles.

Use of Participles in the Book of Acts

Speech Narrative-Discourse

1-28 (1,028) 22 15

1-12 (395) 27 15

13-20 (341) 20 14

21-26 (203) 18 132

27-28 (89) 25 13

Statistics about participial usage show regularity throughout the book. The greater proportion lies in narrative sections, which indicates a difference between narrative and speech more than between differing ethnic locations for the events.

Genitive absolute is a Greek construction that Hebrew and Aramaic syntax does not have. The greater frequency would then imply a Hellenistic tendency. The occurrences of genitive absolute are as follows:

1:8**, 9, 10; 2:6; 3:11, 13*; 4:1, 31, 37; 5:2, 15; 6:1; 7:5*, 21*, 30*, 31*; 9:8; 10:9, 10, 19, 44; 12:13, 18; 13:2, 24*, 42, 43; 14:20; 15:2, 7; 16:16, 35; 17:16; 18:6, 12, 14, 20, 27; 19:6, 30, 33, 36**, 40**; 20:3, 7, 9; 21:5, 10, 14, 17, 21**, 31, 43, 37, 40; 22:17*, 23; 23:7, 10, 11*, 12, 30**; 24:2, 10, 11*, 25, 27; 25:7, 8, 13, 15**, 17**, 21**, 23, 25**, 26**; 26:10*, 11*, 14*, 24; 27:2, 9, 12, 13, 15, 18, 20, 21, 27, 30; 28:3, 6, 8, 13, 17, 19*, 25 Total: 102

* indicates speech ** indicates discourse

The rate of genitive absolutes is computed by dividing the number of genitive absolutes into the number of words:

Speech Discourse Narrative All (- O. T.)

1-12 427 (1) 222 296

13-20 (1) 171 413 232

21-26 206 156 68 108

27-28 362 301 121

Since there are few genitive absolutes in some sections, a clear reading is inconclusive, but some things do stand out. Genitive absolutes occur more frequently in narrative sections. That the Greek idiom is more pronounced in Gentile territories does not hold true: chapters thirteen through twenty, though in Greek territory, have the lowest rate of usage; chapters 21-26 and 27-28, though having about the same percentage of genitive absolutes, are in Palestine and Gentile territory respectively.

The remaining Hebrew and Hellenistic idioms are not well represented in The Acts; so they are considered collectively after the references for each idiom are given.

(1) Hebraistic use of “behold”: 9:10; 2:7

(2) Redundant pronoun: 7:40*

(3) Literal reproduction of “infinitive absolute”: 5:28; 7:34*; 23:14

(4) “By the hand of”: 2:23*; 5:12; 7:25*, 35*; 11:30; 12:7, 11; 14:3; 15:23; 17:25*;

19:11, 26; 21:11; 24:7; 28:17*

(5) Anacolouthon: 7:40*

(6) “Began to . . .”: 1:1, 22; 8:35; 10:37

(7) Extensive use of periphrastic participles: 1:10. 13, 14, 17**; 2:2, 5, 13, 42; 4:31,

36; 5:25**; 8:1, 13, 16, 28; 9:9, 28, 33; 10:24, 30**; 11:5**; 12:5, 6, 12, 20;

13:48; 14:7, 26; 16:9, 12; 18:7, 25; 19:14, 32, 36; 20:8, 13; 21;3, 29, 33; 22:19,

20**, 29; 25:10**, 14** (total: 45; formed with εἰμί, γίνομαι, and ὑπάρχω)

(8) Idiomatic use of “face”: 3:13*, 19*; 5:41; 7:45*; 13:24**; 25:16*

(9) “Men brethren”: 1:16; 2:29, 37; 7:2, 26; 13:15**, 26, 38; 15:7, 13; 22; 1; 23:1,

6; 28:17

(10) Emphatic denial by aposiopesis: 23:9**

(11) “To be into . . .”: 4:11*; 5:36*; 8:20*, 23*; 9:26; 13:14; 15:4; 20:16; 24:17*;

25:15**; 28:6

(12) “And it came to pass . . .”: 4:5; 9:32, 37, 43; 10:25; 11:26; 14:1; 16:16; 19:1;

21:6*, 17*; 27:44; 28:8, 17

(13) προΐστημι with sequential infinitive: 12:3

(14) ἐν τῷ plus infinitive: 2:1; 3:26*; 4:30*; 8:6; 9:3; 11:15; 19:1

(15) Verb of motion giving progressive force to another verb: 9:31

(16) “To God” intensive: 7:20*

There are 140 occurrences of these Hebraisms in the list above. Together they yield the following results:

Narrative Discourse Speech All (- O. T.)

1-12 81 225 97 99

13-20 149 413 215 178

21-26 131 273 147 162

27-28 251 *** 50 217

No pattern seems to emerge from this analysis.

Three more Greek idioms:

(1) Litotes: 1:5**; 12:18; 14:28; 15:2; 19:23, 24; 21:39; 27:20; 28:2

(2) Use of optative mood: 5:24; 8:20*, 31**; 10:17; 17:11, 18**, 27; 20:16; 21:33;

25:20**, 16**; 26:29*; 27:12

(3) Idiomatic use of κατά: 2:46², 47; 5:42; 8:1, 3; 13:2; 7*; 14:23; 15:21*, 23**,

36**; 17:11, 17, 22**; 19:19; 20:20, 23; 21:19; 22:19*; 24:5, 26:3*, 11*

These idioms into chart form appear as follows:

Narrative Discourse Speech

1-12 420 450 (1)

13-20 269 207 269

21-26 479 546 206

27-28 500 — —

As with the Hebrew idioms, there seems to be no pattern. The second division of The Acts shows a greater frequency, but that does not seem to fit the theory that Luke wrote differently in different areas since the speech sections of the second and third parts are not very different.

The analysis of Hebrew and Greek idioms above shows no evident change of frequency by territory. The pattern seems to be determined more by narrative vs. speech than by the territory.

Conclusion

There is no reason to question the accuracy of The Acts’ witness to the kerygma, because it agrees with the contents of the epistles written by some of the speakers in the book.

There is no reason to suppose that The Acts served to cover over dissension between Paul and Peter since the elements of the gospel witnessed by these men in the Acts of the Apostles is true to what we can know of their theologies through their epistles. If there is some difference between their theologies, that difference must lie beyond the gospel elements presented in The Acts. Besides, the idea that there was doctrinal difference between the two apostles just does not exist in the Galatians 2 passage that is supposed to be the source of the claim. As a consequence, the idea that The Acts was written to cover up that dissension falls out of the picture altogether. There was no such dissension for the Book of Acts to cover up.

That Luke composed the speeches of The Acts is not a necessary conclusion. His style seems to adjust when he passes from narrative to dialogue. That is normal since oral speech tends to differ from narration.

We may read Acts of Apostles without wondering whether it presents the preaching of the gospel as it really was in the days of the early church.

Endnotes

¹C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures (Digswell Place: James Nisbet and Co., Ltd., 1952), pp.11-12.

²(a) Genesis 12:3 & 22:18: Acts 3:25; Galatians 3:8 (variously conflated)

(b) Deuteronomy 18:15, 19: Acts 3:22-23; 7:37 (Luke 9:35; Mark 9:7; John 6:14)

(d) Psalm 8:4-6: Hebrews 2:6-8; 1 Corinthians 15:27; Ephesians 1:22; Philippians

3:21; 1 Peter 3:2

(e) Psalm 110:1: Acts 2:34-35; Hebrews 1:13; Mark 12;36

(f) Psalm 118:22-23: Mark 12:10-11; 1 Peter 2:7; Acts 4:11

(g) Isaiah 6:9-10: Matthew 13:14-15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:40; Acts 28:25-

(h) Isaiah 53:1: Romans 10:16; John 12:38

(i) Isaiah 28:16: 1 Peter 2:6, 8; Romans 9:33

(j) Isaiah 40:3-5: Luke 3:4-6; Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 (11:40; 1:40); Luke

2:30

(k) Isaiah 61:1-2: Luke 4:18-19; (Acts 10:38); Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22

(l) Jeremiah 31:31-34: Hebrews 8:8-12 (2 Corinthians 3; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2

Corinthians 6:17-18)

(m) Joel 2:28-32: Acts 2:17-21 (2:39); Romans 10:13

(n) Zechariah 9:9: Matthew 21:5; John 12:15

(o) Habakkuk 2:3-4: Hebrews 10:37-38; Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11

³Particularly and almost solely the stone passages: (a) Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11 (Psalm 118:22); (b) Romans 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:4; (Isaiah 28:16)

Addendum A

1:4b-5 1:11 1:16-17 2:14b-36 3:4b, 3:12b- 4:8b-12, 4:24- 5:29b- 7:2-53, 8:19-

7b-8 20-22 38b-39 6b 26 19b-20 30 32 56, 23

40b 60b

Jesus angels Peter Peter Peter Peter Peter Chris- Peter Stephen Peter

ians

Sinful generation 40

CHRIST’S CHAR.

= a savior 21-23 37

Sufferings 23 18 25-27

Ps.16:10 =

Messianic 29, 31

Resurrection 27, 31

Ascension 27, 31

Divinity 34-36

JESUS

God-empowered 22

Rejected by Jews 16 23 13, 14 27 52

Innocence 13

Killed by Jews 23 14-15 10 30 52

Crucified 10 30

No corruption 31

Resurrection 22 32 15 10 30

Appearances x

Ascension 11 21 33-34 20-21 56

Exaltation 33 31

On David’s 30, 32- 31

Throne 33

Parousia 11 20

Judgeship

Deity 21 34, 36

Messiahship 22 36 6 13, 15 10

18, 20

RESULTS

12 Commissioned 6 12, 15 9-10 30

Repentance 38 19

commanded

Baptism 38

commanded

Rewards 38-39 19 12 31-32

Remission 38 19 31

HS received 38 32

Gifts given 16-21, 12 30 19

Final resurrection

Law not binding

Jews’ salvation 26 12 31

Universal message 8 39

Witnesses 8 11 21-22 32 15 20 32

10:26b, 11:5- 13:16b- 15:7b- 15:13b- 17: 20:18b- 22:1 24:10b- 26:2-23 28:

28b-29 17 41 11 21 22b- 35 3- 21-26: 25b-27 17b-

34b-43 31 21 20,

43, 47 25-29

Peter Peter Peter Peter James Paul Paul Paul Paul Paul Paul

Sinful generation

CHRIST’S CHAR.

= a savior 43 23

Sufferings 3 35-36

Psalm16:10 =

Messianic

Resurrection

Ascension 33

Divinity 7

JESUS

God-empowered 27 21

Rejected by Jews 43 28

Innocence 10 28

Killed by Jews 39 29

Crucified 39 34,35

No corruption

Resurrection 14 40 30 31

Appearances 40-41 31 6-10 12-15

Ascension

Exaltation

On David’s 18

throne

Parousia

Judgeship 42 31

Deity 21 36 17 33 11 21, 24 10

Messiahship 36 17 21

RESULTS

12 Commissioned 42

Repentance 24 30 21

commanded

Baptism 47 16

commanded

Rewards 29 39 9, 11 32

Remission 43 38 16

HS received 15,16

Gifts given 29 47 17

Final resurrection 15

Law not binding 39 10-11 19

Jews’ salvation 36 26 7 14,17 26,31 21 15, 21 25-27

Universal message 34,35,43 5-11, 28

Witnesses 39, 41 31 6-10 12-15

christir.org