A BRIEF SURVEY OF THE BOOK OF ACTS

Outline-
Acts 1:8
I. Witness in Jerusalem (1:1-8:3)
Founding Emphasis
Peter
II. Witness in Judea and Samaria (8:4-12:25)
Forward Emphasis
Philip
III. Witness in Uttermost Parts (12:26-28:31)
Foreign Emphasis
Paul

There are several events, actions, and sequences that appear within the book of Acts, however, following a careful and thorough examination, the majority of these same things cannot be found anywhere else in the New Testament. The obvious question that arises is "why?" While an in-depth study of each individual "non-reoccurring" or unique issue will bring insight into this query there are several fundamental observations that must first be made concerning this book as a whole.

To begin with, there is one key idea that must be realized when dealing with this book if there is to ever be proper interpretation. This key to understanding Acts can be summed up in one word: "transition." The content of this book covers a period of time during which there was a transition from the Gospels to the Epistles (Duty to Doctrine), Judaism to Christianity (One Place to One Person), Law to Grace (Ritual to Release), Jews to Gentiles (Chosen to Changed), Temple to Church (Building to Bodies), Jerusalem to Rome (Waiting to Witness), and National to Global (Israel to Intercontinental). Without the aid of the information found within the book of Acts it would be nearly impossible to understand these things due to the fact that in the Old Testament and the Gospels they are nothing more than shadowy and elusive thoughts while in the Epistles they are, for the most part, fully grown principals. As a testimony to this fact, when describing the book of Acts, commentators have used such words as "pivotal," "linchpin," "link," "connection," "metamorphosis," "transformation," "evolution," "changeover," "shifting," "development," and "beginnings."

Another way to express this theme of "transition" is to say that the book of Acts is of dispensational importance. This means that it records and documents the close of one dispensation-law, and all that it stood for-and the beginning of another-grace, and all that it still stands for today. The catalyst for this profound change and the subsequent extraordinary unfolding of events was none other than the Cross; however, a change of this proportion could not be completed overnight especially considering the thousands of years of indoctrination under the old "system," "covenant," or "testament." Therefore, again, Acts becomes one of the Bible's most crucial books when dealing with this issue of transition. Without this twenty-eight chapter witness understanding the rest of the New Testament would be as difficult as comprehending the second half of any book if the introductionary chapters were ignored. Luke-a physician and frequent traveling companion of the apostle Paul-traced the early development of the body of Christ over a one-generation period. This thirty-year section of time following Christ's ascension saw a primarily Jewish church become predominantly Gentile. Likewise, Luke's pen is also responsible for presenting Christianity as distinct from Judaism but at the same time its ultimate fulfillment.

Just as there is a key idea to the book of Acts there is also a key verse, which, when examined, reiterates the existence of the before mentioned transition. This key verse (1:8) which says, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth," interestingly enough, sets forth a mini-outline which the book of Acts follows perfectly. The first division, the witness in Jerusalem, is found in 1:1-8:3, the second division, the witness in all Judea and Samaria, is found in 8:4-12:25, and the final division, the witness to the ends of the earth, is found in 12:26-28:31. While the Jewish element dominates the first section of the book-its main character being Peter-the final section is almost exclusively focused upon the Gentiles-its main character being Paul-with the middle section becoming a transition with a transition by explaining how this happens-its main character being Philip.

A second fundamental observation that can be made about the book of Acts as a whole, which also helps during singular interpretation, is that it not only has dispensational importance but it also has historical importance. What this means is that even though this book is highly selective in its content-it does not attempt to be a comprehensive survey of the first thirty years of the Christian church-nevertheless, it is still invaluable with regard to the background history that it does provide. For example, it documents, among other things, the birth of the church and the giving of the Holy Spirit as the "Comforter" and "In-dweller" (ch. 2), the first deacon selection (ch.6), the first martyr (ch. 7), Saul's conversion (ch. 9), Salvation unto the Gentiles (ch. 10), and the first Jerusalem council (ch. 15).

A third, and final, comprehensive and fundamental observation that can be seen within the book of Acts as a whole is that this book is of tremendous doctrinal importance. What this means is that this book is the key link in the chain needed for understanding the Epistles that follow, but it is not a book that strictly teaches church doctrine. Therefore, even though Acts is of overall doctrinal importance to the New Testament it is not a book of doctrine! It was not written to a church and not necessarily for the church (1:1), rather, it was meant only to be an informative, historical, and factual record of this early church period's activities, transitions included. Doctrine-which, simply stated, is teaching or instruction that is to be used as the standard for living-that the church is to embody, exemplify, practice, and follow should only be obtained from the New Testament Epistles-the letters written to various churches with the soul purpose of behavioral instruction-and not from the historical observations found within the transitional book of Acts, the Gospels, or the Old Testament. However, this is not to say that these other sections of Scripture are not beneficial to or have nothing to add on how a Christian should live (2 Tim. 3:16-17); they may illustrate, support, or confirm a church doctrine but they are not the source of it. In Act's case, as already pointed out in the first paragraph, many issues and circumstances change, disappear, or are never mentioned again between the opening and the close of the book.

The true undeniable contribution of the book of Acts to the issue of doctrine is not found in theological content but rather in its historical content. Again, it is not a book of doctrine, however, without its historical record truly understanding the Epistles would be a difficult task at best due to the fact that this book is the soul provider of the imperative context needed for proper Epistle interpretation. In most cases Acts is responsible for or allows the reader to answer the "who," "what," "when," "where," "why," and "how" of the Epistles. If an interpreter had to leap from the Old Testament or Gospels straight to the Epistles without any knowledge of the birth, development, and spread of the early church it would be impossible to understand or comprehend the circumstances which caused the Epistles to be written in the first place. Genesis, the history of the world and Israel's beginning, was included in the Old Testament for a reason; likewise, Acts, the history of the Church's beginning, was included in the New Testament for the same reason, which is enlightenment and enablement. Therefore, the book of Acts is comparable to a window through which an observer must look in order to view the surrounding scenery. If the window is tinted, scratched, or soiled the result will be a distorted image of the surrounding view. This is how the book of Acts can be of tremendous doctrinal importance even when doctrine should not be gathered from it. For this reason the reader/interpreter of the book of Acts must be profoundly carefully in his approach and use of its contents so as not to incorrectly "divide" them.

With all of this in mind, the "irregular" or "problem" issues and passages within the book of Acts can now be properly addressed. One such issue that arises within the first ten chapters of Acts deals with the subject of salvation. The "inconsistency" that appears has to do with the presence and order of belief, physical baptism, the laying on of hands, and receiving the Holy Spirit; to be saved are each of these necessary and in what order should they come. If a reader were trying to understand and quantify the doctrine of salvation as it applies to the church within the dispensation of grace using the book of Acts alone his search would more than likely end in confusion. The reason why this doctrine is so elusive is due to the fact that there are three different examples telling how someone is to be saved. However, if the transitional nature and three main divisions-as stated in Acts 1:8-are kept in mind the issue is not so confusing after all.

Here are the facts: in Acts 2:28-after the Holy Spirit's coming at Pentecost and Peter's salvation message-Peter tells the Jews to repent, believe, and be baptized (in that specific order) so that they may receive the Spirit. Secondly, in Acts 8:14-15-after Philip's evangelization of Samaria and the people's subsequent belief and physical baptism-Peter and John are sent from Jerusalem to pray for and lay hands on the Samaritans so that they could receive the Spirit. Lastly, In Acts 10:44-while Peter was still speaking the message of salvation-the Spirit came upon the listening Gentiles when they believed, void of physical baptism or the laying on of hands, yet they spoke in tongues, which was also something the other two groups did not experience.

When Peter offered salvation to the Jews baptism was essential in order for the reception and in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. The reason why is that their baptism in the name of the rejected Messiah identified them with Christ and separated them from the other Jews whom Peter termed a "corrupt" or "perverse generation" (2:40). However, the Samaritan's baptism did not grant them the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. They had to call on Peter and John, two apostles, who then prayed for and laid hands on the new believers, which then brought to them the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. However, opposed to these first two examples, the third finds the Gentile believers being baptized after they had already received the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, their baptism was nothing more than a testimony of their in-dwelling.

Here are several reasons for the differences: First, if the Holy Spirit had been given to the Samaritans while Philip had been preaching they might have thought that their brand of Christianity was distinct from the Judean brand just as their existing worship was distinct from Judaism (see John 4). The result would have been an un-unified or double church with one being in Samaria and the other in Jerusalem. By the calling for and laying on of hands by Peter and John, both apostles from Jerusalem, God assured unity in the infant church. Through Peter and John's actions the Samaritan movement was identified with Judea's. When those in Samaria believed they were regenerated (received eternal life in Christ), but they had not yet received the gift of the Spirit. They were saved but not yet in-dwelt thus making them individual regenerated Christians just as the apostles were before the day of Pentecost. Additionally, every time that it is mentioned in the Bible, the laying on of hands is symbolic of identification. Thus by this act Peter and John were formerly identifying themselves-and all those who they represented-with the Samaritans. Secondly, when Peter spoke the gospel message unto the Gentiles there was an immediate need for a special outward sign testifying to their in-dwelling by the Spirit-hence speaking in tongues-or the Jews would never have believed that within the church the Gentiles were no different from themselves (see 11:1-18; 15:1-11). This anti-Gentile mindset by the Jews is clearly illustrated in the first half of Acts 10 by the vision Peter receives from the Lord as to the "cleanliness" and "uncleanliness" of certain things. As repulsive in the mind of a Jew as a Samaritan was, a Gentile was a hundred thousand times worse. Therefore, again, the sign of tongues was absolutely necessary and was in keeping with the basic purpose of the gift of tongues, which was to bear witness against the unbelief of the Jewish people. The sign gift of tongues swept away any hesitation that the early Jews might have had against the Gentiles. However, such a sign-which was never a condition or requirement for salvation-is no longer needed in today's church. Therefore, the Jews, Samaritans, and the Gentiles were finally united as one in Jesus Christ, which is one of the profound "mysteries" of Christianity. It should be mentioned that even though there were differences in the process of salvation and in-dwelling in the early church-due to the transition from one dispensation and way of thinking to another-today there is no differentiation in the process of salvation for the Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile. Again, the need for such distinctions are no longer required in the modern church.

A final example of just how hard it is to set doctrine solely from the book of Acts with regard to the singular subject of salvation can be found in 19:1-7. In this section of scripture Paul questions twelve Jewish men as to whether or not they have received the Holy Spirit. Their response was that they had no knowledge of the Spirit but only knew of John's baptism. After hearing Paul's explanation they are baptized, had hands laid upon them, were filled with the Spirit, and then spoke in tongues. There can be no doubt that this is an extraordinary and unusual incident. Due to the fact that this event involved such a small and specific group of people there can be no basis for the setting of doctrine and still remain true to sound principles of Bible interpretation. Again, tongues are a sign to the Jews. Everywhere the gift of tongues is mentioned in Acts Jews are somewhere in the picture. Those who appeal to this incident as the basis of or support for people today speaking in tongues at the reception of the Holy Spirit betray their misunderstanding both of the work of the Holy Spirit in this age and the significance of tongues in the early church as a witness.

Another "problem" that can be just as easily misinterpreted as the above issue of salvation is the role and presence of the Holy Spirit in the Christian's life. Again, Acts is a transitional book and should not be used when trying to discern doctrine. Therefore, when certain people and denominations claim-using passages in Acts as proof texts-that a Christian can be saved but at the same time not in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit they ignore the entire nature of the book. Under the Old Testament's system of law the Holy Spirit did not seal nor permanently in-dwell the believer. Before the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit rested upon those God was using empowering them for service but when the task had been completed or due to the unrighteousness of the empowered person the Spirit would leave-as illustrated perfectly by the life of Samson and Saul (Judges 14:6, 19; 15:14-15; 16:20; 1 Sam 10:10; 11:6; 16:14). However, following Jesus' crucifixion-which tore the temple veil in two thus symbolizing the freedom that everyman had in personally entering into the presence of God-resurrection and ascension the "system" changed from resting upon temporarily to dwelling within eternally. The arrival of the Holy Spirit in Acts chapter 2 was a singular one-time event transitioning the current believers from un-dwelt to in-dwelt. Due to the fact that the in-dwelling of the Spirit within the believer is an invisible and immediate process the initial falling of the Spirit needed to have an external witness to authenticate it, hence the rushing wind, flames of fire, and speaking in tongues. Perhaps the greatest in-depth dissertation on the Holy Sprit was giving by Jesus Himself as recorded in John 14:15-31 and 16:5-16.

The following list contains the current fivefold work of the Holy Spirit in the Christian's life throughout the New Testament church during this dispensation of grace: First, there is the regenerating work; this puts Christ into the believer as stated in Roman 8:9b, "And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." This first work of the Spirit clearly disproves any claim to salvation apart from in-dwelling. Secondly, there is the baptizing work; this puts the believer into the body of Christ as stated in 1 Corinthians 12:13, "For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body-whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free-and we were all given the one Spirit to drink." Thirdly, there is the in-dwelling work; this is for fellowship as stated in John 14:16, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever-the Spirit of truth." Fourthly, there is the sealing work; this is the guarantee of eternal salvation which cannot be lost as stated in Ephesians 1:13b-14, "Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of his glory." Fifthly, and lastly, there is the filling work; this is the empowerment for service as stated in Ephesians 5:18, "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit." This last work is the only one that can ever be repeated. Each of the others are immediate, complete, and eternal the moment of salvation, however, being filled and empowered by the Spirit is conditional upon the obedience and purity of the Christian. The carnal Christian does not lose the Spirit but rather the filling of the Spirit's power for effective service. Within the Christian's life the Holy Spirit can be grieved by sin (Eph 4:29-32) and quenched by sin (1 Thess 5:16-24). A Spirit-filled Christian will exhibit the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26) A perfect example of a Spirit-filled Christian can be found in Stephen as recorded in Acts chapter 6 and 7. Therefore, with all of this in mind, the erroneous teachings concerning the Spirit that are supposedly supported by the content of Acts have, in reality, no biblical proof at all with regard to their validity.

A final "issue" that is important to understand about the transitional book of Acts is the presence of many miracles during the early church period but an obvious lack of them in today's. Some would claim that since they were present at the beginning of the church they should still be as prevalent today. However, just as with tongues in the book of Acts was a temporary sign and outward testimony to an unseen truth so also are the miracles which appear throughout the book of Acts. At the beginning of each new era in biblical history there were always miracles performed as a testimony to the truth of what was being spoken. There had been numerous miracles in three earlier periods of Hebrew history-during the days of Moses and Joshua, during the days of Elijah and Elisha, and during the days of Daniel and his friends. Each of those times was a transitional point in Jewish history. Each time the miracles stopped as suddenly as they had begun, and each time they were replaced with the written Word. Each time God opens a new door He calls men's attention through miracles (Acts 3:6-10; 5:12-16; 9:32-43; 13:6-12; 14:3, 8-10; 15:12; 19:11-12; 20:9-12). In other words, miracles are designed to authenticate the divine commission of a religious teacher and attest to the truth of his message. Acts 14:3 says, "So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders." Therefore, there is a direct correlation between the miracles found in Acts and the need for a witness to the, then, new truth of the dispensation of grace and the church age. However, when the testimony had been established the need for authentication was no longer required. This is why the same kinds of miracles described in Acts are not still performed today; there is no longer the need. The testimony of the Word of God is widespread and well known around the world and therefore speaks for itself.

Even though there is not time to deal with a case by case study of every "irregularity" that can be found within the transitional book of Acts, by keeping the already mentioned principles in mind a reader should not have too difficult of a time in understanding and properly interpreting this book. In addition to Act's transitional nature it is, interestingly enough, the only book in the Bible without a definitive ending-meaning that there is no closing statement or "amen." The reason for this is due to the fact that it-meaning church history-is still being written toady. Acts is, theoretically speaking, still an open book.