Acts, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries

The book of Acts is particularly referred as the book of the Spirit. In fact, during the early days, it was referred as The Acts. However, the title was not original since the book of Acts is the second part of the writings of Luke. It is apparent that Luke went along way to point out the presence and the manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles. Further, from the writings of Luke as documented in the Bible, it is evident that he was a historian and a theologian. The book of Acts is a prolongation of the ministry of salvation that was started by Jesus Christ (Shelton & James, 2000). The book of Acts highlights and emphasizes on baptism through the Holy Spirit. Luke identifies that it is through the Holy Spirit that God empowers and fills the people. The Holy Spirit played a vital role on the Apostles lives in preaching and continuing the works that Jesus had started before his death. The Holy Spirit is essential in lives of believers as he speaks to them, and guides them on how to live a consecrated life, preach the word of God, and He manifests through speaking in tongues.

The book of Acts is both a history of the early church and is also a blueprint for the

In the first section, “The Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts: A Challenge in methodology”, Stronstad discusses the theological

This is found by comparing Acts 1:1 with Luke 1:3-4. Acts 1:1: "In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen." Luke 1: 3-4: " (3) Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (4) so that you may know the certainty of things you have been taught." Because Luke's first book was written to Theophilus as was Acts, Luke must be the author of both.

Copy and paste the down arrow ( ) into boxes to show that a unit of material is continuing.Copy and paste the left arrow ( ) into boxes to show where a unit of material ends.

As the article concludes, “Luke knew what he was talking about in recording the riot in the theater. His claim at the outset of the two-part work (Luke and Acts) to have ‘investigated everything accurately and reported them orderly’ is substantiated in Acts

In the first part of Dr. Timothy McGrew's discussion on the dependability of Acts and Luke as an author, McGrew shows and proceeds to interact with the opposing view held by Dr. Bart Ehrman. McGrew respectfully goes through each of Ehrman's negative and misguided beliefs on the contradictions and errors Erhman believes there to be in the book of Acts.

I would agree that the Book of Acts is historically accurate of the early church and its leaders. I think Acts shows great detail about what the early church believed and practiced. Many historians love the book of Acts due to the detailed information that is included in this book. Luke seems to be knowledgeable about culture events that were happening in his era of history that has proven to be accurate. The book of Acts has many different examples that clearly show that Luke was living in this time of history. There is no reason why Acts would not be historically accurate. I would continue to discuss my beliefs about the legitimacy of the Bible. My personal belief is that the Bible is completely historically accurate.

David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992). Luke was the author who may be responsible for connecting the stories written in Acts 15 and Galatians 2:1-10. It is possible that he could of have received, reported information at the same time; about the Jerusalem Council visit and the famine visit. During the twentieth century, hypothetical opinions about the two stories caused a stir up. There are numerous accounts of scholars who have argued if the two meetings were the same. The passage of Acts contains less credibility than the visit written in Galatians. Problems can be found in John Knox's three-visit hypothesis, when analyzing other scholars thoughts. The conclusion is set that details were left out in both passages, and it is possible that the story recorded in Galatians concerns the Jerusalem Council visit(Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1990). The connection between Acts 15 and Galatians 2 is overall to be a mistake made from the author Luke. The two passages are analyzed and broken down by scholars as they research a conclusion for this mystery. The major compliment that is included in both books is that Paul was on a mission to solve the problem referring to the Old Law with leaders and God's people. Luke gave

60-70. The author of Acts (Luke) leaves off with Paul in Rome waiting to make his appeal to Caesar. Meaning it was written before Paul?s death around AD 68. However, the events near the end of Acts happened around A.D. 64. If Acts is the sequel of Luke, (Acts 1:1-3) then it is only logical that Luke was written prior to Acts. This logic places the writing of Luke around A.D. 58-63. This time table working in reverse ?Markan Priority,? places all three Synoptic Gospels very close in time frame: Mark around A.D. 52-56; Matthew A.D. 57-60; and Luke A.D. 58-62. These dates however, are widely debated and are based on my own research. Some sources and commentaries date Luke much later. This debate focuses on the gospel according to Mark. It is unclear whether Mark was written before the death of Peter or after. Peter died around AD 64, if it was written after his death then that pushes all the gospels back several years from what I have concluded here, (assuming Mark was indeed written first, and used as a source for Luke). Both the Holman Christian Study Bible and the Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible agree with my time frame for Luke. These sources along with my own research and the use of ?Markan Priority? lead me to understand this (A.D. 58-63) as the most likely period for the

The story of the early Christian church involves a number of experiences of persecution. Most of the conflicts happen between Christians and Jews. Acts narrates that Peter and John were arrested by Sadducees (4:3-22), then harshly questioned by the Sanhedrin (5:17-42), and then flogged for what they believed in (5:40). The readers can begin to see the reason for persecution from the start—their belief in the unconditional love and resurrection of Jesus. Acts continues to show the demonstration of persecution by telling the stories of how Saul imprisoned many Christians (Ch. 8); how Jews plot to kill Paul (9:23-24, 20:19, 23:12-14); how King Herod executed James and imprisons Peter (12:1-5); how Paul and Barnabas were driven out of Antioch

The book of Acts has such a variety of topics that can be addressed. Every chapter has something in it that can be applied to daily living in the postmodern twenty first century in Canada's western culture, and society. With this in mind, the point of this essay is to address what scholars will have to say about Acts 5.

One of the most hotly debated and crucial historical questions that emerges in a study of Galatians is its correlation to the book of Acts. Some scholars take a positive view of the historical reliability of Acts and have no difficulty in seeing it as a framework for the life and times of Paul’s ministry (J. B. Lightfoot). Others, have a far more skeptical approach fuelled by differences between Acts and the Epistles (Tübingen). The dominant inclination of the scholars who remain unconvinced of the contextual value of Acts has been to downgrade the

There is a lot more in common between the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts than just the authorship of these two works. The two works, separated in the canon by the Fourth Gospel, are two volumes of a single literary project. The prologues themselves describe how the works differ from each other and how they relate to one another as well. The Gospel of Luke covers the ground up until Jesus’s ascension (Lk 24:50-53), and the Book of Acts picks up with the retelling of ascension (Acts 1:1-2). The first volume, being the Gospel of Luke fits well among the other Gospels, where we see a long introduction being narrated similar to the other gospels.

The death of Stephen in Acts chapters seven and eight is an interesting passage that can leave readers quite perplexed – so much takes place in such a short narrative. Stephen’s martyrdom bears an uncanny similarity to the death of Christ in Luke chapter twenty-three; it seems as if the Greek-speaking Jews that condemned Stephen are the same as those who were in favor of executing Christ. Perhaps the most interesting thing about this passage though, is the introduction of Saul, who appears in the narrative almost unexpectedly, leaving the reader wondering about his significance in the death of Stephen. Through this transitional story, Luke shows