THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES


This in my opinion is the most dynamic book in the New Testament. It comes right after the Gospels and before the Letters, explaining how the very first Christian community gave birth to Christianity. Peter and Paul are its main characters, with many minor characters introduced along the way. It is claimed to have been written by Luke, the author of the Gospel by that name, and a part-time fellow traveler with Paul on his missionary journeys. It is also thought to be written in the best Greek among all the New Testament writings.
Somewhere in his letters Paul refers to Luke as his “beloved physician”, so we can conclude that Luke was some sort of doctor as well as Paul’s companion. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that Luke does not travel along with Paul on all his missionary journeys. Luke begins his account (1:1-4) of Jesus’ life and teachings by promising to offer a more accurate and thorough account of Jesus’ life and teaching than others have. This claim is couched in a promise to one “Theophilus”, which seems to have been a general term for referring to “lovers of God.” The Book of Acts begins abruptly where the Gospel of Luke ends.
After presenting various episodes experienced by the dead Jesus’ grieving disciples and the claims of some to have seen the risen Jesus, Luke launches into an account of how and why the first Christian community came together, how Peter and other disciples were imprisoned, and the initial meetings of the first Christian disciples. Stephen and Peter offer accounts of how the work of Jesus fulfills Old Testament prophecies, Stphen is martyred and Saul, the persecutor of Christians, is converted to become a follower of Jesus (Chapter 9). For a while Peter and Paul share the leadership of the early church group (Chaps. 11-12).
Soon however Paul, along with Barnabas, emerges as the primary leader of the Church and the two of them set off on the first missionary journey through what is now Turkey (then Asia Minor). After they returned to Jerusalem the young Church gathered together and decided, in the words of its head James, the brother of Jesus, that there should no longer be a distinction between Jewish and Gentile believers, but that all are brothers in Christ. (Chapter 15). A bit later on Paul chose Silas to go with him on a return, yet wider, missionary journey all the way to Greece. (Chapters 15-16).
They made their way through Greece, including Thessolonika and Athens, to Corinth, and then back through Ephesus on their return to Jerusalem, preaching the Gospel in many cities all along the way. After having been arrested once again in Jerusalem, Paul appealed to Rome as a Roman Citizen (Chap. 22) and so he was sent off under guard by boat to Italy. After several perilous episodes along the way. Several trials took place yet in Jerusalem before Paul was sent off to Rome.
The sea journey Rome was long and hazardous, with unexpected stops and hazardous stops on Crete and Malta (Chaps. 27-28). Once in Rome, Paul was put under house arrest, but was free to greet visitors and share the Gospel. He stayed there for two years, sharing the Gospel with all would listen, “quite openly and without hinderance.” (28:31). Here Luke’s narrative comes to an end. We are never told, by Luke or anyone else, what actually happened to Paul after that, it is completely open to speculation. Some surmise that he was released and went to Spain to continue to spread the Gospel. Others guess he may have been crucified in Rome, as was Peter, but there is no real evidence for such a conclusion.
For me the larger question is why did Luke not have some sort of fitting end to his story? He had such an elaborate beginning it seems odd that he would not have a fitting literary conclusion to his story. After all, at the outset he promised to provide a straight and full account of things, yet he seems to have simply quit. I find myself wondering if there was not some more fitting conclusion to his story. It is, indeed, a puzzle. In a way the abrupt ending suggests a yet more significant development without actually carrying it out.


One response to “THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES”

  1. Indeed, since Acts is probably completed around 80 to 90 AD, you would think Luke would know what happened to Paul, since he would no doubt have been dead by then. Tradition, of course, places him in Rome in the early 60’s, where he was martyred by beheading. Jim Tabor, a Biblical archaeologist of our time, says the church dedicated to St. Paul in Rome actually has a first century church beneath it and that it possessed a skull that tradition holds is that of Paul. Jim thinks it is authentic. Perhaps Luke wanted to focus on the end of his life as a witness rather than as a martyr. He wanted us to see the church as the story he is telling more than a story about Paul.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *