Acts 1:4-8 Exegesis

TRANSLATION AND EXEGETICAL ISSUES

Acts 1:4-8 offers much in regard to providing scripture that rests at the very heart and cornerstone of the Christian church in terms of God's purpose for it and in terms of God's provisions for it. Since the text is so very fundamental to everything else that the church would do, many people would seek to expose technicalities concerning it. The central message however is very clear, and that message is that Jesus returned after the resurrection and prepared the disciples to became the apostles, receive the Holy Ghost, and to do the continued work of the church.

The NASB begins Acts 1:4 with the phrase, "gathering them together -- ." (NASB) The NIV however begins the same passage with the phrase, "On one occasion, while he was eating with them. -- " (NIV) Regarding the differences between translation, a person could question if Jesus had just gathered the disciples together for a lecture or if Jesus just happened to be informally eating with the disciples. If Jesus had gathered the disciples together formally, then it would have a much different expression of the character of Jesus than if he had just happened to gather informally with the disciples over a meal; moreover, one case stresses the closeness of Christ to the disciples but the other stresses more the importance of the message that Jesus would tell.

The NASB gives a third person narration of much of what Jesus had said in Acts 1:4 whereas the NIV and the NLT both give a much greater amount of the same verse under direct quotes as being the words of Jesus Christ. The question of how much of verse four is a quotation of Jesus Christ's actual words and how much of it is just simply said by the narrator is a matter of significant difference between the translations not because the meaning is different but because the authority can be seen as different. The result is that both the NIV and the NLT show Jesus Christ commanding the disciples whereas the NASB only describes Jesus as having commanded the disciples not to leave Jerusalem. The main difference between narrating what Jesus said in Acts 1:4 and directly quoting what Jesus said is that one would appear to have much more authority than the other, and in this regard a direct quote of God in the flesh would be worth more than simply a third person's view.

The NLT in verse six shows the disciples asking Jesus if the time had come for him to "free" Israel (Greek apokathistemi), but the NIV and the NASB do not use this term at all but instead, "restoring the kingdom to Israel" is used in both translations. The Greek term means to cure, restore, or reestablish. (Strong, 582) A person could wrongly interpret the word "free" in the NLT to mean a liberation of all law, but such an interpretation would in fact be wrong because freeing Israel in the context would involve bringing the people back to the native national ideology. "Restoring the kingdom to Israel" as in the NASB is much better because it demonstrates that Israel would not seek to be free of all law but instead would seek to be redeemed from a corrupt oppressive foreign government.

Verse seven uses the phrase, "times and dates" in the NIV and NLT, but it uses the phrase "times or epochs" in the NASB. The Greek term kairos (kairous) that is being translated as dates or epochs can be described as, "fitness, proportion, suitableness; a fitting situation, -- a limited period of time marked by a suitableness of circumstances -- " (Perschbacher, 216) Clearly, in verse seven, Jesus is talking about entire periods of time that would be defined by the Father. In such a way, days as suggested by, "dates" or times marked by heroism as suggested by, "epochs" would not accurately capture the meaning of the original text.

Verse eight in the NLT uses the phrase, " -- telling people about me everywhere" whereas the same phrase is never seen in the same verse in he NIV or NASB. In fact the Greek text does not have anything for reference for the phrase, but one could reason that the NLT translators wanted to be very explanatory in their translation. What likely happened is that the translators found the need to add many additional words to clarify the meaning of the original text.

Historical Context

Scholars like Frederick Bruce have argued at length that the book of Acts was written by Luke, (Bruce, 1) and sound reason to argue against the case does not exist. Bruce makes the point that the purpose of Acts was to show what Jesus continues to do, and in this regard Bruce links Pentecost to the continued ministry of Jesus Christ. (Bruce, 21) Acts 1:4-8 has the purpose of Jesus Christ finishing his physical ministry with the apostles by instructing about the promise of the Holy Ghost and by describing what he wanted them to do (namely spreading the gospel), and in this regard Acts 1:4-8 sets up an introduction to Pentecost.

The audience for Jesus speaking in Acts 1:4-8 was the disciples, but what Jesus said and did was put into print for a purpose beyond the benefit of the disciples. Acts, written to the ruler Theophilus (Acts 1:1), generally gives testimony to the activities of the development of the Christian church or Christian movement since the time after the death of Jesus Christ. The one event that caused a vast expansion in the early church was Pentecost, and Acts 1:4-8 is sort of like a preparation by Jesus Christ for Pentecost. When looking at Acts 1:4-8 in this regard, a person should note that Acts would have likely been written with a certain formality and structure since it was written to a ruler, and in this regard the setting of Acts 1:4 may have been portrayed more like Jesus having a formal gathering with his disciples (this would then set the tone of the rest of the passage).

Jesus would have developed a custom of eating with the disciples since many of them had been together for a number of years in very close proximity as the earthly ministry of Jesus was performed. For Jesus thus to eat with the disciples was not unusual, but what was unusual is that he had arisen from the dead and then was eating with the disciples. The shock of Jesus being alive, eating with the disciples, and teaching them after his crucifixion may have caused the environment to be much different than common casual discussion over a meal.

Literary Analysis

The point of Acts 1:4-8 is that Jesus Christ after his resurrection had set up the disciples in place while assuring them that the Holy Ghost would in fact baptize them as a gift, and Jesus Christ set up instruction for the disciples to do future work as well. The theme of the passage of Acts 1:4-8 is like a foundation or cornerstone for others, besides the disciples, to join in the organization of the Christian church. The work that the disciples (the apostles or ambassadors) had to do was to witness about Jesus to the very ends of the earth, and the work that God would do was to bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Some may consider the bestowing of the gift of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost as being a one time activity done by God, others may see it as a gift given to the disciples in exchange for their future service as apostles, and others may see the gift of the Holy Ghost as a ongoing endowment given to those that believe in the testimony of Jesus Christ. Also note that some may think that the work that Christ sent the apostles to do was only a task given to them, but others would see the task as given to all Christians. Overall, my case is that the gift of the Holy Ghost and the mission of the apostles was both a reoccurring endowment and a work to be continued until it would be stopped by God, and to this end Acts 8:14-15 shows believers outside of Pentecost receiving the Holy Ghost and Acts 7 shows Stephen, who was not one of the original twelve, giving testimony concerning Jesus Christ.

Application

The most immediate point for the contemporary hearer is that Jesus Christ gave a continual job to the disciples (that thus became the apostles), and Christ gave a continual gift to be given to the believers (the baptism of the Holy Ghost). Some people may not consider evangelism to be important, but as can be seen the job of testifying concerning Jesus Christ is a ongoing activity that is not peripheral to Christianity but instead is central. One of the issues that is often raised based upon the text is that only certain people should act as ambassadors of Christ since Jesus only commanded a few people to go forth and testify about him, and although much dispute can be raised over who should testify concerning Christ and who should not, the fact of the mater is that scripture does not directly address who can testify about Christ and who cannot.

A theological problem that could be an issue regarding the freedom to testify concerning Christ has much to do with issues of church administration and leadership. If people freely testify concerning Jesus Christ, then their testimony could undercut the organization of the church if these, "evangelists" are not selling belief in Christ and the local church as a package deal. The evangelists could become powerful enough by evangelism that they could hypothetically act as pastors and take, "business" away from a local church. The theological problem with such a view is that the early church recognized new converts into one holistic organization even when gained by other apostles because the apostles recognized each other's authority as being apostles since they knew each other in relation to knowing Jesus, but as time progressed and as the original apostles died, Christians would not be able to recognize each other as being Christian based upon what recognized authority had entered them into the Christian faith by their conversion.

The point is that Christian doctrine would have eventually become the central focus for identifying the genuine believers from those that did have anything to do with the apostles, but in the earlier times Christians would not have had to have known much about Christian doctrine to be counted as a Christian but instead the apostles would have mentored their converts and would have had a network of people that would have been able to identify each other as Christian. In contrast, the gift of the Holy Ghost in Pentecost was really the most important way for believers to identify other believers, and if this was taken into consideration more so than apostolic authority, then far less of an issue would exist with being able to identify Christians from one another. If for example Christians could look for the gift of the Holy Ghost to identify God's working, then evangelism by non-church leaders would ideally not raise any issues of struggles of power or authority.

In conclusion, sermon topics could include how to recognize genuine evangelism from phony evangelism, how we know that the gift of the Holy Ghost is continual, and how we know that the work of the apostles to spread the news about Jesus is still required of churches today. A possible sermon title could be, "The Foundation for Evangelism and the Work of the Holy Ghost." Overall, a sermon could focus on many of the problems of today while taking into account the biblical truth derived from Acts 1:4-8.

Bibliography:

Bruce, Frederick. The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 3^rdedition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990.

Perschbacher, Wesley. The Analytical Greek Lexicon. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1990.

Strong, James, ed. John Kohlenberger III and James Swanson. The Strongest Strong's: Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001.