THE BOOK OF ACTS

1. Who wrote the Book of Acts?

1.1. t has already been determined that the Book of Acts was written by Luke. Acts is the
second part of a two-volume work. The Book of Acts begins with a summary of the previous
volume, the Gospel of Luke, and then introduces the second volume. n Acts 1:1-5, Luke writes:
The first account composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day
when he was taken up to heaven, after he had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom he
had chosen. To these he also presented himself alive after his suffering, by many convincing proofs,
appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the Kingdom of
God. Gathering them together, he commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the
Father had promised, "which," he said, "you heard of from me for John baptized with water, but you will
be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
Clearly, he intends Acts to be the second volume of a two volume work: volume one (Luke)
describes Jesus' ministry and passion; volume two (Acts) describes events after Jesus'
ascension and the giving of the Holy Spirit. As a literary parallel to Luke-Acts, it should be noted
that Josephus writes a two-volume work, and introduces the second volume in a similar
manner. He states:
n the first volume of this work, my most esteemed Epaphroditus, demonstrated the antiquity of our
race, corroborating my statements by the writings of Phoenicians, Chaldeans and Egyptians, besides
citing as witnesses numerous Greek historians; also challenged the statements of Manetho,
Chaeremon and some others. shall now proceed to refute the rest of the authors who attacked us...
(Apion 2.1)
1.2. The correct use of somewhat idiosyncratic political titles corroborates the view that the
Book of Acts was written by someone historically close to the events narrated, such as Luke
was. To get such details correct would be much less likely for an author who was further
removed in time from the events.
The city magistrates of Thessalonica are referred to by the title of politarchai, which
inscriptions have confirmed to be the correct title for them (17:6, 8).
The chief magistrate in Ephesus are said to be called grammateus, which inscriptions
have confirmed to be the correct title (19:35).
The title proconsul (anthupatos) is correctly used for the governors of the two senatorial
provinces referred to in Acts (13:7-8, Acts 18:12).
1.3. Lukan authorship of the Book of Acts explains the extensive linguistic agreement between
the it and the Gospel of Luke and the details that Luke includes about the church in Antioch, the
city from which he hailed. What does Luke say about Antioch in Acts 6:5 and 13:1, and how
may this indicate Lukan authorship?
n Acts 6:5 Nicolas is the only one of the seven men chosen whose provenance is specified:
"Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch." Luke may have included the fact because it was of
personal interest to him since this is where he was from. n addition, Antioch is the only gentile
church whose leaders (prophets and teachers) are mentioned: "Now there were at Antioch, in
the church that was there, prophets and teachers: Barnabas, and Simeon who was called
Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch,
and Saul" (Acts 13:1). Luke may have included these names because he was personally
familiar with these men.
1.4. Several early, reliable secondary sources confirm the Lukan authorship of the Book of
Acts.
1.4.1. The Muratorian canon states the following about the authorship of Acts: "Moreover the
Acts of the Apostles are included in one book. For 'most excellent Theophilus' Luke compiled
the individual events that took place in his presence..."
1.4.2. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue identifies Luke as the author of a second volume, Acts:
"And afterwards the same Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles."
1.4.3. n context of a discussion of authorship of Hebrews and whether the author was Luke,
Origen identifies the author of Acts as Luke, the same who wrote the gospel: "Others that it was
Luke, he who wrote the gospel and the Acts" (H.E. 6.25.14).
1.4.4. Clement of Alexandria accepts Lukan authorship of Acts, as indicated by the following
statement: "As Luke in the Acts of the Apostles relates that Paul said, 'Men of Athens,
perceive that in all things you are too superstitious'" (Strom. 5.12). Similarly, Eusebius indicates
that the view of Clement of Alexandria was that Luke wrote the Book of Acts, and from this
concluded further that Luke may also have translated Hebrews since it is so much like Acts in
style and vocabulary. He writes, "And he says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is Paul's, and
was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language; but that Luke, having carefully translated
it, gave it to the Greeks, and hence the same coloring in the expression is discoverable in this
letter and the Acts" (H.E. 6.14.2-3).
1.4.5. Jerome states as an accepted fact that Luke wrote both a gospel and the Book of Acts:
"He also wrote another excellent volume to which he prefixed the title Acts of the Apostles, a
history which extends to the second year of Paul's sojourn at Rome, that is to the fourth year of
Nero" (de vir. ill. 7).

2. For whom was the Book of Acts written?
From Acts 1:1, what do you conclude about the intended readership of the Book of Acts?
The intended reader of the Book of Acts was Theophilus. No doubt, Luke also had a larger
readership in mind.

3. When was the Book of Acts written?
3.1. nternal Evidence
3.1.1. From Acts 28:30, what do you conclude about the terminus a quo of the composition of
the Book of Acts? Keep in mind that chapter 28 is the last chapter of the book.
At the earliest, the Book of Acts was written two years after Paul's imprisonment in Rome, c.
62.
3.1.2. What might the fact that the last event in the Book of Acts is Paul's imprisonment in
Rome also indicate about the terminus ad quem of the Book of Acts?
t could be that Luke said nothing about events after Paul's first two years of his Roman
imprisonment because nothing had happened. This means that he completed the Book of Acts
two years after Paul arrived in Rome.
3.1.3. There are several arguments from silence for a relatively early date for the Book of Acts:
There is no direct reference to or any other evidence of acquaintance with Paul's letters in
Acts, which may be interpreted to mean that Luke wrote his work before a collection of his
letters was made and began to circulate among the churches, some time in the latter part
of the first century.
There is no direct reference or even allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem, which may
imply that Acts was written before 70.
There is no reference to the death of James the brother of Jesus, the leader of the
Jerusalem church, shortly before Vespasian's siege of Jerusalem in 68. The omission of
this important event may imply that Luke wrote Acts before that event.
There is no reference to Nero's persecution of the church, which may suggest that Luke
completed the work before 65.
How convincing are these arguments from silence?
While a certain amount of weight should be given to these arguments, it should be noted,
nonetheless, that arguments from silence are weak arguments. There may be other
explanations for the omission of these events from the Book of Acts other than that they have
not yet happened.
3.2. External Evidence
3.2.1. Any conclusion about the terminus ad quem of the Book of Acts based upon the fact that
it ends with Paul's having been in prison in Rome for two years is weakened by two data.
A. f Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a source for his gospel, if he wrote his gospel before the
Book of Acts and if Mark wrote his gospel in the late 60's, then the Book of Acts must have
been written several years after Paul's first Roman imprisonment.
B. The Muratorian canon offers an early and plausible explanation for why Luke omitted events
that took place after Paul's first two years of imprisonment in Rome:
"Luke addressed them [Luke and Acts] to the most excellent Theophilus, because the several events
took place when he was present; he makes this plain by the omission of the passion of Peter and of the
journey of Paul when he left Rome for Spain."
As already indicated, it seems that the explanation is that Luke did not include accounts of
Peter's death or Paul's further journeys after his release from his Roman incarceration (to
Spain?) because he was not an eyewitness of these events (and presumably because he did
not have access to other eyewitness accounts).
3.3. What do you conclude about the date of the composition of the Book of Acts?
The internal and external evidence do not point in the same direction. Based on the internal
evidence it is possible to argue for a date before 70 and even as early as the early 60's,
whereas on the external evidence it is possible to argue for a date not before the early 70's. t is
probably best to leave the question unanswered or to provide a wide range of possible dates.

4. Where was the Book of Acts written?
4.1. From all available data, where might Luke have written the Book of Acts?
Luke could have written the Book of Acts almost anywhere. t is possible that Luke wrote his
work in stages, so that the Book of Acts was written in many places.
4.2. Jerome concludes from the fact that Luke concludes the Book of Acts with Paul's
imprisonment in Rome that Luke wrote the work in Rome. He writes, "He [Luke] also wrote
another excellent volume to which he prefixed the title Acts of the Apostles, a history which
extends to the second year of Paul's sojourn at Rome, that is to the fourth year of Nero, from
which we learn that the book was composed in that same city" (de vir. ill. 7). Jerome's
inference, however, seems to be without basis, for two reasons. First, there is no reason that
the location of the last event in the work should be the place where it was written. Second, Luke
could easily have written the Book of Acts in stages, in which case there would be many
provenances for the text.

5. What is the Book of Acts?
5.1. ntroduction
The Book of Acts is a selective history of the early church told from a Christian point of view; it
focuses primarily on two figures: Peter and Paul. The title "Acts of the Apostles" was first used
by renaeus in the late second century (Adv. Haer. 3.13.3); it has been suggested, however,
that the better title of the work would be "Acts of the Holy Spirit," since the events described
occur consequent upon the giving of the Spirit (Acts 2).
5.2. Sources of Book of Acts
5.2.1. There are three passages consisting of ninety-seven verses in which Luke uses the first
person plural, rather than the third person as in the rest of the book (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-21:18;
27:1-28:16). Although some have disputed it, the best explanation for these "we-sections" is
Luke's own memory or perhaps short accounts that he himself wrote of events in which he was
a participant. f one claims, as is sometimes done, that the we-sections are a fraudulent attempt
to claim eyewitness status for the Book of Acts, the question that needs to be addressed is why
the whole document was not written in the first person. Another explanation for the we-sections
sometimes proffered is that the author used a source written by an eyewitness of the events
narrated, which would explain the use of the first person. But why the author did not identify the
source or change the first person into the third person remains a problem. Besides one would
need to explain the linguistic homogeneity of the Book of Acts. The we-sections are
linguistically so indistinguishable from the rest of Acts (and the Gospel of Luke), that it is highly
probable that whoever wrote the we-sections wrote the whole work (Hawkins, Horae
Synopticae, 182-89).
5.2.2. Luke had one written source at his disposal: the copy of the letter sent from the
Jerusalem church to Paul's predominately gentile congregations, which he reproduces in Acts
15:23-29. f Luke made use of other written sources, however, it is impossible to identify them
based on vocabulary and style: there is such a linguistic homogeneity in Acts that one must
conclude that, if they existed at all, Luke thoroughly redacted his sources. But, in fact, the
hypothesis that Luke used other written sources is unnecessary. This is because Luke had
access to many people who were eyewitnesses of the events that he described in the Book of
Acts, which means that he would not need written sources, even if they existed. Based on the
following passages, what might Luke's network of eyewitness sources have been?
A. Acts 12:12; Col 4:10, 14
Luke's contact with John Mark as potential source for early events centered in Jerusalem or
nearby.
B. Acts 21:8; 6:5 (see Acts 6:1-8:1)
Luke's contact with Philip and his daughters at Caesarea (Acts 21:8) could be a source of
information for Acts 6:1-8:3, since Philip was associated with Stephen, since both were one of
the seven (Acts 6:5).
C. Acts 21:16
Luke lodged with a Cypriot named Mnason who is said to be an "early disciple," which would
make him a possible source of information on the earliest history of the church.
D. Acts 11:22, 25-26; 13:1; 15:22, 35
Luke's connection to Antioch may mean that he had contact with Barnabas, who likewise was a
sometime resident of the city. Barnabas could have given Luke information about the early
career of Paul since he was an associate of Paul in those early years (Acts 9, 13:1-16:10).
E. Acts 20:4; Col 4:7-17; Phlm 23-24
Luke's contact with Paul himself and men in his circle, such Sopater of Berea, the son of
Pyrrhus, and by Aristarchus and Secundus of the Thessalonians, and Gaius of Derbe, and
Timothy, and Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia, would give Luke access to information about
events in Paul's apostolic career to which he was not an eyewitness (20:4). There are also
other of Paul's associates to whom Luke may have had access (Col 4:7-17; Phlm 23-24).
5.2.3. There are many speeches in the Book of Acts, constituting about twenty percent of the
work: 1:15-22 (Peter); 2:14-36 (Peter); 3:12-26 (Peter); 4:8-12 (Peter); 4:24-31 (Peter and
John); 5:34-39 (Gamaliel); 7:2-53 (Stephen); 10:34-43 (Peter); 11:1-17 (Peter); 13:16-40 (Paul);
15:7-11 (Peter); 15:13-21 (James); 17:22-31 (Paul); 20:18-35 (Paul); 22:1-21 (Paul); 25:14-22
(Festus); 26:1-23 (Paul). Although these are probably not all verbatim accounts, Luke no doubt
provides a accurate summary of what was said by these people on different occasions. He
probably adhered to the same methodological ideal as the Greek historian Thucydides:
As to the speeches which were made either before or during the war, it was hard for me, and for others
who reported them to me, to recollect the exact words. have therefore put into the mouth of each
speaker the sentiments proper to the occasion, expressed as thought he would be likely to express
them, while at the same time endeavored, as nearly as could, to give the general purport of what was
actually said ( 1.22.1).
Similarly, Luke would have agreed unquestionably with Polybius' disapproval of the practice of
inventing speeches, since the task of the historian was "to instruct and convince for all time
serious students by the truth of the facts and the speeches he narrates" (. 2.56.10-12).
After all he promised Theophilus that he would "write an orderly account for you...in order you
may know the certainty of the things you have been taught" (Luke 1:3-4). Thus the skeptical
position that the author of the Book of Acts created the speeches as expressions of his own
theological views is unjustified. Luke no doubt obtained information about what was said on
various occasions from his sources and then composed his speeches based on that.
5.3. The Book of Acts can be structured in different ways. These are three possibilities.
5.3.1. The Book of Acts can be organized according to a geographical and biographical
structure.
A. 1-12 From Jerusalem to Antioch focusing on Peter
B. 13-28 From Antioch to Rome focusing on Paul
5.3.2. The Book of Acts can be organized according to a thematic/theological structure, having
as its mid-point Acts 15:35/36.
A. Part One: The period before the clarification of the gentile question at the Jerusalem council
(Acts 1-15)
B. Part Two: The period after the clarification of the gentile question at the Jerusalem council
(Acts15-28)
5.3.3. The Book of Acts can be organized in accord with another geographical structure based
on the missionary command in Acts 1:8 to bear witness in Jerusalem, in all Judea, in Samaria,
and to the far reaches of the earth. t should be noted that in the two-volume work of Luke/Acts
there is first (Luke) a movement towards Jerusalem where Jesus is crucified and resurrected,
which is followed by a movement away from Jerusalem after the ascension of Jesus (Acts).
Related to this is the movement in Luke/Acts from Jew to gentile. This is the structure that is
followed below.
5.4. Outline of the Book of Acts
A. 1:1-5
n the prologue, Luke describes his work as the second volume of a two-volume work, which he
has dedicated to Theophilus.

B. 1:6-26
Jesus ascends to heaven, and the disciples remain in Jerusalem waiting the fulfillment of the
giving of the Holy Spirit. Lots are drawn in order to replace Judas as one of the twelve; the lot
falls to Matthias.

C. 2:1-8:3
The spread of gospel within Jerusalem is described.
1. 2:1-41
The Holy Spirit falls upon those gathered in upper room of a house, and they begin to speak in
other languages, so that all foreigners who have come to Jerusalem for the festival of
Pentecost hear the gospel in their native tongues. Peter explains what is happening as the
fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32. He also cites Ps 16:8-11 as fulfilled by Jesus' resurrection: God did
not allow his holy one to see corruption. Peter commands all to repent and be baptized in order
that they may receive the Holy Spirit.
2. 2:42-47
The early Jerusalem church is described as meeting regularly to hear the apostles' teaching,
share common life, break bread and pray. The church met in the Temple, and broke bread in
private homes; there was a communal sharing of all things. A sense of awe was upon all, and
many wonders and signs were performed through the apostles. Many were added day by day
to the church.
3. 3:1-26
Peter heals a lame man in the Temple and explains what he did to those who witnessed the
healing. He explains that he healed the lame man by the power of Jesus, whom they handed
over to Pilate to ne executed, but whom God raised from the dead. Peter exhorts his hearers to
repent, and cites Deut 18, 15, 18-19 as fulfilled in Jesus: he is the prophet like Moses whom
God has raised up.
4. 4:1-22
Because of the healing of the lame man, Peter and John are brought before the Sanhedrin.
Peter defends his action by saying that it was in the name of Jesus that this lame man was
healed. He cites Ps 118:22 as fulfilled in Jesus: he is the rejected capstone.
5. 4:23-31
Upon their release, Peter and John pray citing Ps 2:1-2 as fulfilled of Jesus: he is the anointed
one installed by God against whom and the Lord the nations rage and the kings and rulers
oppose. After the prayer the place where they prayed was filled with the Holy Spirit.
6. 4:32-37
The Jerusalem church is described as living communally, sharing everything in common.
7. 5:1-11
Ananias and Sapphira die under God's judgment, because they lied to the Holy Spirit about the
value of some land that they sold.
8. 5:12-16
t is said that the apostles performed many signs and wonders and that the church met in
Solomon's portico and was held in high regard by the people. Many were added to the church
and people brought their sick and demon possessed to be healed.
9. 5:17-42
The apostles are arrested by the high priest, but are released by an angel and commanded to
preach in the Temple. When later told not to teach in Jesus' name, Peter replies that they must
obey God rather than men. Gamaliel convinces the Sanhedrin to take a "wait and see" attitude
towards the Christian movement, because, if it is of man, it will founder, but, if it is of God, they
will be found to be opposing God.
10. 6:1-7
The apostles chose seven men to take care of the daily distribution of food to the widows. One
of these is Stephen.
11. 6:8-7:60
Stephen is brought to the Sanhedrin because he allegedly speaking against the Temple and
the Law. He defends himself in a long discourse, in which he tries to prove from scripture God
does not dwell in houses made with human hands and that Jesus is the Righteous One, whom
his generation put to death. Stephen's hearers are enraged and stone him; a certain Saul is
complicit in this.
12. 8:1-3
After Stephen's martyrdom, a persecution breaks out against the church in Jerusalem. Many
are scattered to other parts of Judea and to Samaria. Unexplainably, only the apostles remain
behind.

D. 8:4-11:18
The spread of the gospel into Samaria and coastal regions is described.
1. 8:4-25
Philip preaches "the Christ" in Samaria with much success, healing and exorcising. Even
Simon the sorcerer believes, who later tries to buy the gift of the Spirit from the apostles, who
arrived in Samaria after hearing of Philip's success. Peter rebukes Simon, who repents.
2. 8:26-40
An angel of the Lord commands Philip to go to the road that leads from Jerusalem to Gaza,
where he encounters an Ethiopian eunuch, puzzling over the meaning of sa 53. Philip explains
that this passage speaks of Jesus, proclaims to the eunuch the gospel about Jesus and then
baptizes him. Philip is snatched away by the Spirit, finding himself at Azotus, where he
preaches the gospel.
3. 9:1-31
Saul (Paul) pursues believers from Jerusalem who fled to Damascus. On his way, he sees a
vision of the risen Christ and hears him ask why Paul is persecuting him. Saul is struck blind,
but continues to Damascus, where a certain Ananias, being commanded by God, reluctantly
goes and prays for Saul, whereupon his sight is restored. Paul is said to be God's chosen
instrument to bring God's name before the gentiles. Saul is then baptized and begins to preach
that Jesus is the son of God and the Christ in Damascus. Because of hostility from unbelieving
Jews, Saul must secretly escape from the city and goes to Jerusalem. Because the church still
feared Saul, Barnabas takes Saul to the apostles. Saul disputes with the Hellenistic Jews in
Jerusalem and they plot against him. Thus he escapes to Caesarea.
4. 9:32-42
Peter preaches the gospel in Lydda, Sharon and Joppa. He heals Aeneas in Lydda and
Tabitha in Joppa. n Joppa many believed because of this Tabitha's healing.
5. 10:1-11:18
The "god-fearing" Roman Cornelius receives an angelic command to send to Joppa for Peter.
n Joppa, Peter has a vision in which God tells him not to call unclean what God has called
clean. When Cornelius's emissaries arrive Peter understands that the vision refers to gentiles,
so he travels to Caesarea, where he preaches the gospel to Cornelius and his household.
While Peter is preaching, the Holy Spirit falls upon Cornelius and others. n amazement, Peter
concludes that he cannot withhold baptism from these gentiles whom God has poured out his
Holy Spirit.

E. 11:19-15:35
The spread of the gospel to Antioch and beyond is described.
1. 11:19-30
The founding of the church in Antioch is described. When news of this came to them, the
apostles in Jerusalem sent Barnabas, who went to Tarsus and brought Saul to Antioch. The
prophet Agabus came to Antioch from Jerusalem and foretold of a severe famine.
2. 12:1-19a
Herod Agrippa martyrs James the apostle. Peter is also arrested and placed in prison in order
to be executed after Passover. Peter escapes, however, from prison by the assistance of an
angel.
3. 12:19b-25
Herod Agrippa dies under the judgment of God because he did not give glory to God when the
people of Sidon and Tyre proclaimed him as a god.
4. 13:1-14:28
Paul's first missionary journey with Silas and John Mark is described.
a. 13:1-12
Paul and company travel from Antioch to Seleucia to Salamis on Cyprus, where they preached
the gospel in Jewish synagogues. n Paphos in Cyprus, they meet opposition from the sorcerer
Elymas, who tries to turn the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, away from the faith. n the power of
the Spirit, Saul strikes him blind as judgment.
b. 13:13-52
By ship, Saul and his associated go to Perga in the province of Pamphylia, where John Mark
leaves and returns to Jerusalem. From here they go to Pisidian Antioch in the Roman province
of Galatia, where Saul preaches the gospel in the synagogue there. On a Sabbath, Saul
explains that the people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, but God raised
him from the dead; he cites Ps 2:7, sa 55:3 and Ps 16:10 as fulfilled of Jesus. On the next
Sabbath, Paul and Barnabas warn the Jews, who have rejected their message, that they will
take the gospel to the gentiles, citing sa 49:6 as predictive of this. Paul and Barnabas are
forced by the Jews to leave Antioch.
c. 14:1-20
From Antioch, Paul and Barnabas go to conium, where they are also preach in the synagogue
there and forced to leave. They then travel to Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia. n Lystra,
because of Paul's healing of a lame man, the people acclaim Barnabas and Paul as gods. But
Jews from Antioch and conium convince the crowds otherwise and they stone Paul.
d. 14:20-28
Paul and Barnabas trace their steps backwards, travel through the cities in which they already
preached the gospel and return to Antioch in Syria.
5. 15:1-35
A dispute arises in Antioch about whether gentiles must keep the Torah in order to be saved.
Paul and Barnabas travel to Jerusalem to have the issue resolved. After some discussion, it is
decided that gentiles do not have to keep the Torah; only a few conditions are imposed them:
to abstain what has been sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what has been strangled and
from sexual immorality. Peter supports Paul's position by relating the fact that God gave the
Holy Spirit to uncircumcised gentiles, and James undergirds Paul's view by an interpretation of
Amos 9:11-12, which predicts the conversion of the gentiles. The apostles and elders in
Jerusalem choose men to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, taking along with them a
letter confirming the decision.

F. 15:36-20:6
The spread of the gospel westward to Macedonia and Greece is described during Paul's
second and third missionary journeys.
1. 15:26-18:22: Paul's Second Missionary Journey
a. 15:36-41
Paul and Barnabas plan to revisit the churches founded during the first missionary journey, but
have a falling out because Barnabas wants to bring John Mark against Paul's better judgment.
Paul joins with Silas and travel through Cilicia and Syria strengthening the churches.
b. 16:1-10
Paul travels to Derbe and Lystra, where he meets Timothy, who joins Paul in his missionary
travels. The group goes through Phrygia and Galatia until they arrive at Troas. Because Paul
has a vision, they decide to sail to Macedonia.
c. 16:11-40
Paul and his associates sail to Samothrace, to Neapolis and then to Philippi. n Philippi, Lydia
and her household believe the gospel and are baptized; Paul and his associates stay at Lydia's
house. On one occasion, Paul drives out a divining spirit from a slave girl, with the result that
her masters are outrage at the loss of potential future earnings from this girl's ability to tell the
future. As a result, Paul and Silas are thrown in prison, where during that night an earthquake
shakes the building and their jailer comes to faith and is baptized along with his household. n
the morning they are released.
d. 17:1-15
Paul and Silas travel through Amphipolis and Apollonia and arrive at Thessalonica, where Paul
preaches in the synagogue over successive Sabbaths. Although some Jews believe, others
seek to do harm to Paul and Silas. They leave for Berea, where the Jews there were more
receptive to the gospel. Paul travels to Athens and waits for Timothy and Silas to follow.
e. 17:16-34
n Athens, Paul preaches the gospel at the Areapagus. He tells the Athenians that the altar to
the unknown God is the God whom he wishes to make known to them. This God, Paul says,
calls for repentance, and has appointed a time when he will judge the world by Jesus, whom he
has raised from the dead.
f. 18:1-17
Paul travels to Corinth, where he preaches the gospel in the synagogue there, but experiences
resistance and has more success with the gentiles. Paul is joined in Corinth by Timothy and
Silas, and stays in the city for six months. On one occasion, hostile Jews accuse Paul
unsuccessfully to Gallio, the proconsul.
g. 18:18-22
From Corinth, Paul sets sail for Syria with Aquila and Priscilla. Landing in Caesarea, he visits
Jerusalem and then returns to Antioch.
2. 18:23-21:14: Paul's Third Missionary Journey
a. 18:23
Paul travels from Antioch through the region of Galatia and Phrygia, strengthening the
churches.
b. 18:24-28
The ministry of Apollos is described. An Alexandrian, Apollos comes to Ephesus praching the
gospel, but has known only the baptism of John. Aquila and Priscilla explain to him the "way"
more accurately. Apollos continues his preaching in Achaia.
c. 19:1-20
While Apollos is in Corinth, Paul travels to Ephesus, where he finds some disciples who have
not received the baptism of the Spirit, but have only been baptized into John's baptism. These
disciples are then baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus and receive the Holy Spirit. Paul
spends the first three months speaking in the synagogue, and, after experiencing resistance,
moves to the lecture hall of Tyrannus. Paul spends two years in Ephesus. n Ephesus, God
does works of power through Paul, and many believe, giving up sorcery. n one case, the seven
sons of Sceva attempt to exorcize a man in the name of the Jesus whom Paul proclaims, but
the demon turns on them and gives them a beating, not recognizing their authority.
d. 19:21-41
Paul resolves to go to Macedonia and Achaia. Before he leaves Ephesus, however, a riot
breaks out, instigated by the silversmiths who manufacture idols of the goddess Artemis; they
are afraid that Paul's evangelistic success will ruin their business. The city scribe calms the
mob, and no harm comes to Paul or any others.
e. 20:1-12
Paul travels to Macedonia and then the Achaia, where he stays for three months. Because of a
plot against his life, he leaves Achaia with several of his associates, eventually meeting up with
them again in Troas. n Troas, Paul heals Eutychus, who falls from a window after falling sleep.
f. 20:13-38
Paul and his associates set sail from Troas, arriving at Miletus, where he sends a message for
the Ephesian elders to meet with him. He tells them that his destination is Jerusalem, in spite of
the dangers that await him there. He reminds the Ephesian elders of his ministry in Ephesus
and warns them that false teachers will infiltrate their church in the future.
g. 21:1-14
Paul and his associates travel from Miletus to Tyre, where Paul is warned by disciples through
the Spirit not to go the Jerusalem. From Tyre the group travel to Ptolemais and then to
Caesarea, where they stay with Philip, who has four daughters, who are prophetesses. The
prophet Agabus comes from Judea and warns Paul not to go to Jerusalem, because he will be
arrested.

G. 21:15-28:31
The spread of the gospel to Rome is described.
1. 21:15-36
Upon arriving in Jerusalem, Paul visits James and all the elders, relating to them what God did
among the gentiles. n order to allay fears that Paul has forsaken the Law, the elders
recommend that Paul fulfill the Nazarite oath at the Temple. While Paul is in the Temple, some
Jews from Asia start a riot by accusing Paul of bringing gentiles into the Temple. Roman
soldiers quell the riot and arrest Paul.
2. 21:37-22:30
Paul addresses the riotous mob, explaining how he came to be a believer and apostle. At the
point when he says that, while he was in a trance, Jesus told him to go to the gentiles, the mob
begins to shout for Paul's death. Paul is taken to the citadel adjacent to the Temple, and,
because he is a Roman citizen, is spared an interrogation by torture. He is released and
brought before the Sanhedrin the next day.
3. 23:1-11
The Sanhedrin is divided in their opinion of Paul: the Pharisees on the council are sympathetic
because of Paul's belief in the resurrection, whereas the Sadducees are hostile. The
disagreement turns violent and Paul is taken back to the citadel for his own protection.
4. 23:12-24:26
Some Jews conspire to kill Paul by ambushing him. Paul's nephew hears of the plot and tells
the tribune, who then transfers Paul in an armed escort to Caesarea, to be under the protection
of the governor Felix. There Paul waits in vain for the Jews from Jerusalem to lay a complaint
against him. While in custody, Paul explains how he became the object of Jewish hostility. Paul
also speaks to Felix and his wife, Drusilla, who is Jewish, about faith in Christ Jesus.
5. 24:27-26:30
Two years after Paul arrives in Caesarea, Felix is replaced by Festus. Paul's Jewish opponents
ask Festus to bring Paul to Jerusalem to stand trial, because they are planning to kill Paul on
the way to Jerusalem. Because Festus is inclined to cooperate with Paul's accusers, Paul
appeals to Caesar, to have his case heard in Rome. Before being sent to Rome, Paul is
interviewed by Agrippa and his sister Berenice. Paul explains how he came to be an apostle
to the gentiles and how he came to be in custody in Caesarea. He explains to Agrippa that he
proclaims nothing that Moses and the prophets did not say would happen, that the Messiah
must suffer and be raised from the dead. Paul attempts to convince Agrippa to believe.
6. 27:1-44
Paul sets sail as a prisoner for Rome, but on the way is shipwrecked, and washes up on the
island of Malta. The centurion prevents the soldiers from killing Paul along with the other
prisoners.
7. 28:1-10
On the island of Malta, Paul is bitten by a poisonous snake, but miraculously does not die. The
local inhabitants take him to be a god. Paul also heals the father of Publius, the chief official on
the island, as well as many others.
8. 28:11-30
Paul is placed upon a ship that has wintered on the island, and lands at Syracuse, Rhegium
and then at Puteoli, where Paul is met by some believers. Arriving in Rome, Paul is put under
house arrest, but charges are not forthcoming from Paul's accusers. Paul teaches the Roman
Jews about the Kingdom of God, and tries to convince them from the Law and prophets about
Jesus. Some Jews are convinced, but many are not, so that Paul quotes sa 6:9-10 as
describing their obstinacy. Paul has been in Rome for two at the end of the Book of Acts.
5.5. Claims of Historical naccuracy in the Book of Acts
There are two passages in particular that some point to as historical errors by the author of the
Book of Acts. But there are other ways of explaining the data than saying that the author made
a mistake.
5.5.1. Acts 5:33-39 gives an summary of the speech of the Pharisee Gamaliel, in which he
refers a revolutionary movement led by Theudas (5:36) followed by one under the leadership of
Judas the Galilean. Josephus dates the emergence of Judas to about 6, but refers to a
revolutionary movement by a Theudas under the procurator during the time of the procurator
Fadus (44-46), after the time when Gamaliel is speaking (. 20.97-99). Based on this
discrepancy with Josephus some have argued that Luke made an historical error: that he
wrongly placed Theudas before Judas. But it is possible that there were two revolutionary
movements led by two separate men named Theudas, one before Judas the Galilean and one
during the time of Fadus.
5.5.2. Acts 23:31 has been interpreted to mean that Paul was brought by military escort (two
hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, two hundred spearmen) from Jerusalem to Antipatris in a
single night, a distance of about forty-five miles. This is said to be an historical mistake because
such a journey would be impossible, since thirty miles a day was about the maximum journey
on foot. There are other ways of interpreting this verse, however. t is possible to understand
"the soldiers...took Paul and brought him by night to Antipatris" to refer to a two-day journey, so
that "by night" does not refer to one night but two. The point made is not the duration of the
journey during the period of one night but that they chose to travel at night, as opposed to the
much hotter day time, and to rest during the day. f so then the reference to "on the next day"
does not refer to the next day after leaving Jerusalem but the day after arriving in Antipatris.
The party may have reached Nicopolis after the first night (c. 22 miles), and then travelled from
there to Antipatris during the next night.

6. Why was the Book of Acts written?
6.1. What does Acts 1:1-5 indicate about Luke's purpose in writing the Book of Acts?
t indicates that Luke wrote the Book of Acts to inform Theophilus about events that took place
after Jesus' ascension and after the baptism of the Holy Spirit, "the promise of the Father."
One could describe the Book of Acts as the "acts" of the Holy Spirit.
6.2. What would you describe the purpose of Luke's two-volume work, Luke-Acts, to be?
Luke's two-volume work is an account of the appearance of God's salvation in human history.
The first volume deals with the coming of the Messiah, his death and resurrection. The second
volume deals with the ascension of the Messiah, the sending of the Spirit, and the evangelism
of Jews, Samaritans and gentiles, beginning in Jerusalem and moving progressively outward.
The focus of the Book of Acts is on Peter and Paul predominantly, which means that Luke was
selective in what he included in his work.
BACK TO NDEX PAGE

Last Modified on 10/02/2014 17:17:13