Acts is an often-overlooked book in Christian circles for several reasons. The gospels give us details about Jesus, so we focus on them the most. Paul’s writings and the other letters give us guidance on living as Christians in a broken world, so they are examined and discussed continuously. Revelation is a mysterious book speaking to our times and taking us to the re-creation of this world as the kingdom of God, so it is the focus of much study and speculation. Acts, on the other hand, is viewed as straight forward history without much theological import for modern Christians. The book is easy to understand and not very controversial since it has received a lot of nonbiblical corroboration of the events and people mentioned in Acts. Mostly, preachers use the information in the book of Acts to give historical background to Paul’s letters. While it is true that Acts makes an excellent reference tool when reading the epistles, the book of Acts has many spiritual lessons to teach modern Christians and is worthy of the time and effort required to dig into the verses and understand how God interacts with His people.
Theophilus: The book of Acts is part of a larger work written to a single individual named Theophilus. “I, too, have carefully investigated everything from the beginning and have decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:3-4). Nothing much is known about Theophilus, except that, based on the name, he was a Gentile and based on the honorific translated as “most excellent,” Theophilus was likely a high government official. Two possibilities for the reason that Luke writes his orderly account of Jesus’ life and the activities of the early church are either that Theophilus was a Christian convert who was also highly placed in the Roman government, or the books were written as a report to one of the officials in charge of Paul’s judicial proceedings. Those who support the idea of Theophilus being a Christian speculate that Theophilus may have been one of Luke’s converts while others believe that Luke was writing to counteract false teachings that were circulating at the time. The idea of the books being part of Paul’s legal defense has support from the fact that they are meticulously researched reports that would have taken a great deal of time and effort to put together. That much effort usually results from highly motivated individuals e.g., Luke desperately trying to gain his friend and mentor’s freedom from Roman prisons.
Companion Books: The books of Luke and Acts are companion books that were originally treated as one whole. One reason that the books were able to be divided is because they were likely written on separate scrolls originally. Remember that Luke would not have been using bound volumes as we define books today. As one source explains, “Jesus lived during the age of papyrus rolls, which were no more than 33-feet long. This as much as anything else determined the length of literary works in antiquity. It is no accident that, for example, Luke’s Gospel is the maximum length for an ancient document, and thus another papyrus roll had to be used to inscribe the Book of Acts” (http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-59/life-times-of-jesus-of-nazareth-did-you-know.html). Most books in the New Testament are much shorter. When the two books of Luke and Acts are taken together, they comprise about 25% of the whole New Testament. The very length of the book of Acts is one reason to take its study seriously. God included each book, indeed each detail in the books, for a reason. The book of Acts must have a lot of lessons for us since God prompted Luke to include so much detail.
Author: The author of Acts is Luke. We know a lot more about Luke than Theophilus. Luke was a companion to Paul, a fellow worker in spreading the good news of Jesus’ death and resurrection. He was with Paul when he wrote his letter to the Colossians. “Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas greet you.” (Colossians 4:14). We know from this greeting that Luke was a doctor, which might explain why he thought to discover and include so many details of Jesus’ birth when he was writing his gospel. Colossians also lets us know that Luke was a Gentile since Paul first lists his Jewish co-workers and then the Gentiles. Luke was also with Paul when he wrote to Philemon “Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in the Messiah Jesus, sends you greetings, as do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my fellow workers.” (Philemon 1:23-24). Both Philemon and Colossians were written about the same time in A.D. 62. Another letter that mentions Luke’s presence with Paul is 2 Timothy, which was written about A.D. 66. At that time, loyal Luke was the only companion who remained with Paul when Paul was writing his second letter to Timothy. “Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful in my ministry.” (2 Timothy 4:11). In Colossians, Luke and Demas were with Paul, but in 2 Timothy, Paul complains that Demas has abandoned him and gone back to the world. However, Luke has faithfully remained. Thus, from Paul’s various epistles, we know that Luke was actively working to spread the gospel from at least A.D. 62 to 66 about 30 years after Jesus’ death.
Dates: Although Luke and Acts are considered to be part of the same book, Luke was written earlier than Acts. The gospel of Luke is thought to have been written in A.D. 59, four years before Acts, which has been given a date of approximately A.D. 63. If we reverse the procedure of most preachers and use the epistles of Paul as commentary on Acts, we can infer that Luke was probably working on the book of Acts while he was with Paul in Rome. An interesting detail about Acts comes out when we try to correlate Luke’s activities with the time that his gospel was written. “After they had come to Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit did not permit them. So passing by Mysia, they came down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night. A man of Macedonia stood and pleaded with him, saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” Now after he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go to Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us to preach the gospel to them” (Acts 16:7-10). We can infer the time at which Luke joined Paul’s ministry by the pronoun switch in these verses. Before these verses, Paul and Timothy are always referred to as “they” until their arrival in Troas in Acts 16:8, but the pronoun changes to “we” in Acts 16:10. From this information, biblical scholars have inferred that Luke joined Paul and Timothy in Troas. With regard to the timing of this event, “The apostle Paul visited Troas during his second (49 to 52 A.D.) and third (53 to 58 A.D.) missionary journeys” (<http://www.biblestudy.org/biblepic/troas-apostle-paul-missionary-journeys.html> ). Thus, the gospel of Luke could not have been started until at least A.D. 49. Many scholars believe that the gospel of Luke was actually written while Paul and Luke were living in the area of the city of Corinth for several years. Putting all this information together, it is most likely that Luke joined with Paul sometime from A.D. 53-58 and assisted Paul in spreading the gospel from about A.D. 58-66. In other words, they worked together for eight years, and maybe longer since some people believe that Luke may have been among the group of Greeks converted in the first Gentile church in Antioch. If this is true, Luke likely knew Paul well even before joining him at Troas. One last interesting detail about Luke is that he may have been the brother of another of Paul’s companions called Titus. One of the books of the Bible is a letter written from Paul to this same Titus.
Writing Style: Luke was a methodical researcher and scientific writer. He himself claims to have carefully researched his books. “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:1-3). Luke was not one of the original followers of Jesus, but he had access to eyewitnesses from the apostles to Jesus’ mother to James (Jesus’ brother and leader of the Jerusalem church) to Barnabas to Philip the deacon/evangelist to countless others who had interacted with Jesus. Luke’s meticulous attention to detail has helped to lend credibility to the accuracy of the Bible regarding historical events and has silenced many skeptics as archaeology has confirmed his facts time and again. One author puts it this way, “Luke-Acts follows the Scientific tradition that is technical and professional writing on medicine, mathematics, engineering, and the like. It intends to be a scientific treatise of Jesus and the early Christian movement” (The Preface to Luke’s Gospel: Literary Conventions and Social Context in Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1 by LCA Alexander). On a side note, it is interesting that John, an eyewitness of Jesus, says that Jesus did so many more actions than were written in his gospel that they would fill books and books while Luke, the researcher, says that he wrote about everything Jesus did and taught from the beginning until He ascended. Of course, there is no disagreement here. This simply shows a difference in personality. Luke was an analytical, focused man who wrote from a plan and careful research. He was trying to say that His research was thorough and accurate while John was a man of humility and faith who emphasized that he had not been able to reveal even a small portion of who and what Jesus was and did. John is about relationships while Luke is about factual details.
Themes: There are five important theological points made in the book of Acts. The first assertion is that the church is the result of God’s initiative. The formation of God’s people composed of Jews and Gentiles is not a man-made construct. Whether Luke is describing the actions of Peter, Stephen, or Paul, God is always the instigator of the growth of the church. The second theme is that the church is not a newly created organization. Instead, it is the restoration of the kingdom of Israel in fulfillment of the promises of the Old Testament. Jesus, the Leader of the church, is at the right hand of God directing His people as they travel a road that was first laid out for Israel in the Old Testament. The third theme is that the gift of the Holy Spirit to the church is the fulfillment of the promises that God made in the Old Testament. More specifically, the books of Joel and Ezekiel promised that the Holy Spirit would be poured out in the last days on the true people of God. Acts explains that this event is being fulfilled. The Holy Spirit’s presence becomes a sign, or seal, of God’s acceptance and approval of Gentiles becoming an integral part of His people. The fourth point is that the church has not rejected God’s law. This is shown most clearly in the actions of the Jerusalem Council where they researched the laws of the books of Moses in order to decide on the relationships that Gentile Christians should have with Jewish Christians. The fifth theme is a vindication of Paul as a righteous teacher of Israel. This is an affirmation that Paul is preaching under divine charge and has just as much authority as Peter.
Content: Acts primarily focuses on the activities of two men: Peter and Paul. The first half of Acts describes the events in the early church from Jesus’ ascension until the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. During this time, the disciples replace Judas Iscariot with Matthias, and they are baptized with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. The spread of the gospel among the Jews and then the Samaritans is outlined. Then the Gentile author Luke starts homing in on the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles from an Ethiopian eunuch to Peter’s defense of the conversion of Cornelius to the first Gentile church in Antioch. All along the way, the justification for the inclusion of Gentiles is attributed to the seal of approval provided by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Some commentators have suggested that the title of the book should be the Acts of the Holy Spirit rather than the Acts of the Apostles because of the focus on the interactions between Jesus’ followers and the Spirit that is maintained throughout the book. The second half of the book pivots, and Paul becomes the main character while Peter is no longer mentioned. The book delineates Paul’s persecution of the church when he was still known as Saul and goes on to describe his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus. Paul’s time in the Antioch church and selection by the Holy Spirit to be the first missionary sets the stage for descriptions of his missionary journeys. The final section of Acts follows Paul during his imprisonment and journey to Rome to appeal his case. Throughout Paul’s ministry, the theme continues to be the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles through the actions of the Holy Spirit.
Issues of the Early Church: While Acts focuses on the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles, it also provides a snapshot of the interactions within the early church. Acts demonstrates to us that the first Christians displayed both the best and worst characteristics of humanity. Many listened to the Spirit’s guidance and treated each other with love and respect. Others, like Ananias and Saphira, tried to use the Spirit for their own profit. There were controversies and persecution. Christian leaders tried to compromise to please various factions of believers. Generous believers opened their homes to their traveling brothers and sisters. Men of God argued over the correct manner of dealing with a young Christian who had failed in his service to Jesus in the past. In short, the modern church has much in common with the early followers of Jesus. Finding inspiration in the successes and warnings in the failures is reason enough to study this remarkable book.