Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

C. K. Robertson, PhD, DD, is Canon to the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church and Distinguished Visiting Professor at the General Theological Seminary. His books include Transforming Stewardship, Conversations with Scripture: Acts of the Apostles, and the DVD series, Hazardous Saints, all via Church Publishing. He earned the PhD from the University of Durham, Durham, England. He lives in Oviedo, Florida

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

CONVERSATIONS WITH SCRIPTURE

Morehouse Publishing

Contents

Introduction to the Series.............................ixAutobiographical Note..................................xiiiCHAPTER ONE Apostolic Call............................1CHAPTER TWO Apostolic Concord.........................17CHAPTER THREE Apostolic Challenge.....................31CHAPTER FOUR Apostolic Change.........................45CHAPTER FIVE Apostolic Compromise.....................57CHAPTER SIX Apostolic Colleagues......................69CHAPTER SEVEN Apostolic Champion......................85Acknowledgments........................................96Study Questions........................................97Suggestions for Further Reading........................113About the Author.......................................114

Chapter One

Raise up in this and every land evangelists and heralds of your kingdom, that your Church may proclaim the unsearchable riches of our Savior. COLLECT OF A MISSIONARY, THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER

Although it is an anonymous work, from the second century on the general assumption has been that the book of Acts was written by Luke, Paul's sometime traveling companion affectionately described as the "beloved physician" (Col. 4:14). It is noteworthy that the author does not appear overly concerned about being personally acknowledged. Even in those passages where the third-person narrative of the book suddenly shifts to a first-person account, as if the narrator is including himself in the story, the author's identity remains unknown, an unnamed member of Paul's supporting cast. There have been a few scholars in recent years who have questioned Luke's authorship of Acts, but since there has been no conclusive evidence to prove otherwise, we will here follow the ancient and much-accepted tradition and refer to the author as Luke. One thing is clear: Luke certainly knew how to offer his readers an exciting account.

The first and primary recipient of Acts was a character known only as Theophilus (1:1). The Greek name may be translated as "loved by God," "dear to God" or "friend of God." Whoever this Theophilus was, he appears to have been of high social standing, given Luke's earlier designation, "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:3). He may have been Luke's patron or backer, helping fund the writing and distribution of his works. Certainly, Luke displays deference towards Theophilus, yet at the same time gives us a sense that this patron is also a pupil, a catechist who needs to"know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed" (Luke 1:4).

Even so, it is clear that Acts, like Luke's gospel, was intended for a wider audience. Indeed, as one New Testament scholar has noted, "Whoever Theophilus was, he is all of us." We are all beloved of God, dear to God. And we, like Theophilus and those other earliest readers, are all recipients of God's good news ... a generation removed. For neither those first readers nor we can boast having seen and heard Jesus in the flesh, and many then, like now, never encountered the Twelve and other early church leaders in person. Thus, for Theophilus and Luke's other initial readers, Acts fills in the blanks about God's work following Jesus' life, death, and resurrection.

Luke's Sequel: Story or History?

Often referred to as Luke's "sequel," Acts has long been understood as the second in a two-volume work, in which the gospel account focuses on the life and work of Jesus from before his birth to his death and resurrection, and Acts picks up the story from that point and gives attention to the exploits of the inheritors of Jesus' mission and ministry.

At the same time, it should be noted that those church leaders who put together the canon of the New Testament placed Acts not directly after Luke, but rather after Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John together. All four gospels were included together, forming a multifaceted genre, each piece balancing the nuances and emphases of the others. It is noteworthy, moreover, that Acts was chosen to follow all four together, thereby serving as a sequel not only to Luke but also to the entire gospel tradition.

Acts thus serves as an ideal bridge between the four gospels and the various epistles, revealing a crucial part of the Christian story. Without it, we might well wonder how a small, Palestinian-based, Jewish sectarian movement became the geographically expansive and ethnically diverse phenomenon that we encounter in Paul's letters. For that matter, Acts helps us understand how Paul, a character who does not even appear in the gospel accounts, suddenly is center-stage in the history of the Christian church. Truly, it is a bridge document.

It would be difficult, however, to describe Acts as "history" in the modern sense. It certainly does not fit into the seemingly neat category of objective reporting of facts with its descriptions of miracles, visions, and divine guidance. Of course, it is important for us to note that objective reporting as we define it today is something of an illusion. It has often been said that "history is written by the winners," and there is some truth to this. Ironically, today the field has broadened considerably, so that histories are being written from many views and vantage points. Revisionist histories are flourishing, as is the genre of literature known as "historical fiction." In an age of 24/7 news coverage, it is becoming accepted that even the best histories are in some way subjective, even if only in terms of what is included and what is left out.

It is clear at the start of Acts that Luke's goal is to follow up on the "orderly account" (Lk. 1:1) of his gospel, which told "all the Jesus did and taught from the beginning" (Acts 1:1), picking up at the point where the other left off. Unlike his "former treatise," however, Acts would not have three other narratives against which to check its reporting; in the New Testament, the only balancing agent to Luke's reporting of the church's early days is the collection of Paul's letters. Comparisons between Paul's and Luke's reminiscences of the same or similar events (such as the Jerusalem Council or the relationship between Paul and Peter) reveal the kind of nuanced differences that comparisons between the gospels also show about what really happened. If we want to read Acts as a kind of ancient historical account, it is important to read Paul's take on things as well. It is not that one is right and the other wrong—again, such distinctions arise from a false assumption of "objective" history—but that Luke viewed Paul and Peter and the rest of those leaders in ways that Paul himself did not. As we include Acts and the epistles together, then we begin to understand better that crucial period in the church's history.

Acts is, of course, more than history. It is also story, a very lively story—Luke's success story of early Christianity. This is obvious from the start, as Jesus predicts the ever-expanding geographical parameters that will result from the work of his "witnesses" (1:8). Almost immediately after Jesus' departure from the scene, we see impressive—no, explosive—growth on the day of Pentecost. The increasing numbers and deepening commitment that Luke...