NOT DATES FOR GEO-POLITICAL REVOLUTION
--BUT MANDATE FOR SPIRIT-FILLED WORLD-WIDE WITNESS
Acts 1:6-8
1.6 Οἱ μὲν ον συνελθόντες ἠρώτων αὐτὸν λέγοντες, Κύριε, εἰ ἐν τ χρόνῳ τούτῳ
ἀποκαθιστάνεις τὴν βασιλείαν τ ̓Ισραήλ; 1.7 επεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Οὐχ ὑμν ἐστιν γνναι
χρόνους ἢ καιροὺς οὓς ὁ πατὴρ ἔθετο ἐν τ ἰδίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ, 1.8 ἀλλὰ λήμψεσθε δύναμιν
ἐπελθόντος το ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐφ̓ ὑμς καὶ ἔσεσθέ μου μάρτυρες ἔν τε ̓Ιερουσαλὴμ καὶ [ἐν]
πάσῃ τ ̓Ιουδαίᾳ καὶ Σαμαρείᾳ καὶ ἕως ἐσχάτου τς γς.
(6) So they, therefore, having come together, were asking him saying, "Lord, are you at
this time re-establishing the Kingdom for Israel?" (7) Then he said to them, "It is not for you
people to know times or seasons which the Father has placed within his own authority. (8)
But rather, you people will receive power when the Set-apart Spirit has come upon you; and
you will be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and [in] all the [country of] Judea, and in Samaria,
and as far as the earth's end!"
THE DEPARTING AND COMING OF THE RISEN LORD JESUS
Acts 1:9-11
1.9 καὶ τατα εἰπὼν βλεπόντων αὐτν ἐπήρθη, καὶ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τν
ὀφθαλμν αὐτν. 1.10 καὶ ὡς ἀτενίζοντες σαν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν πορευομένου αὐτο, καὶ
ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο παρειστήκεισαν αὐτος ἐν ἐσθήσεσι λευκας, 1.11 οἳ καὶ επαν, ῎Ανδρες
Γαλιλαοι, τί ἑστήκατε [ἐμ]βλέποντες εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν; οτος ὁ ̓Ιησος ὁ ἀναλημφθεὶς ἀφ̓
ὑμν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν οὕτως ἐλεύσεται ὃν τρόπον ἐθεάσασθε αὐτὸν πορευόμενον εἰς τὸν
οὐρανόν.
(9) And having said these things, while they are watching, he was lifted up--and a cloud
received him from their sight. (10) And as they were looking intently into the heaven, while he
is departing, and look--two men stood beside them in white clothes, (11) who also said, "Men-Galileans--why have you stood (here), looking [intently] into the heaven? This Jesus who has
been taken up from you people into the heaven in this way will come, just as you observed him
going into the heaven."
Text with Commentary
(6) So they, therefore,25 having come together,26 were asking him saying, "Lord, are
opening phrase in Greek is Οἱ μὲν ον, Hoi men oun, literally, "They then there-fore."
Lake and Cadbury commented that "The narrative of the deuteros logos ['second writing']
begins with...a favorite formula of Acts in opening a new story which is nevertheless
connected with what goes before." See the further use of the phrase ...men oun in Acts 1:18;
2:41; 5:41; 8:4, 25; 9:31; 11:19; 12:5; 13:4; 14:3; 15:3, 30; 16:5; 17:12, 17, 30; 19:32, 38;
23:18, 22, 31; 25:4, 11; 26:4, 9; and 28:5.
26The New Jerusalem Bible observes that Acts 1:6 "takes up the narrative broken off in Luke
24:49." (p. 1799)
25The
20
you at this time27 re-establishing28 the Kingdom for Israel?"29 (7) Then he said to them,30 "It is
27Literally,
"if in this time?"
Greek verb is ἀποκαθιστάνεις, apokathistaneis, the second person singular of the
present indicative active of the verb apokathistanein, or apokathistemi. The verb means
“restore to an earlier condition,” or “re-establish.” It is used in the sense of “to return or
restore,” for example, something that has been borrowed, or a damaged building or canal.
Especially in the Bible, both in the Septuagint and in the Greek New Testament, it is used as a
medical technical term, meaning, for example, to “restore” the voice of a person who cannot
speak, or “restore” a paralyzed arm or hand. It was used among the Greeks at times in a
“cosmological” sense, of “restoring, or renewing the world.”
28The
But more appropriately for this passage, Acts 1:6, the verb is used in a political sense,
“to reconstitute a state” (see 1 Maccabees 15:3, where Antiochus writes the following words
to Simon, the High Priest in Jerusalem: ...τινες λοιμοὶ κατεκράτησαν τς βασιλείας τν
πατέρων ἡμν βούλομαι δὲ ἀντιποιήσασθαι τς βασιλείας ὅπως ἀποκαταστήσω αὐτὴν
ὡς ν τὸ πρότερον..., tines loimoi katekratesan tes basileias ton pateron hemon boulomai de antipoiesasthai tes basileias hopos apokatasteso auten hos en to proteron, “...
Certain scoundrels have gained control of the kingdom of our ancestors, and I intend to lay
claim to the kingdom so that I may restore [apokatasteso] it as it formerly was...” See also
Josephus Antiquities 13, 261; 408; Life, 183.)
Albrecht Oepke states that “The term becomes a technical one for the restoration of
Israel to its own land by Yahweh: Jeremiah 16:15: [καὶ ἀποκαταστήσω αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν γν
αὐτν ἣν ἔδωκα τος πατράσιν αὐτν, kai apokatasteso autous eis ten gen auton hen
edoka tois patrasin auton, ‘I will restore them to their own land which I gave to their fathers’];
23:8 [found at the end of the chapter in Greek]; 24:6 ...Hosea 11:11; compare Jeremiah 15:
19 [’If you turn around, and I will restore you’]; Ezekiel 16:55 [’And your sister Sodom, and her
daughters, I will restore, even as they were at the first!’--what a promise of salvation!];..Psalm
15:5 [’You, Lord, are the one who restores my inheritance to me!’]...” (Theological Dictionary
of the New Testament I, p. 388)
We conclude that the question asked by the followers of Jesus is a political question--it
has to do with the “time for revolution” against Rome, and the reestablishment of Israel to its
former independent status as a self-ruling kingdom. It is not a question about “the end of
time,” nor is it a question concerning “the second coming of Jesus.” It is a political question,
expressing the deep longing of first-century Jews for the overthrow of the Romans, and the
restoration of Israel to national sovereignty. The question implies that the role of the risen Lord
Jesus in history is that of a political activist, who leads his followers into revolutionary acts,
overthrowing the Roman armies of occupation in Israel, and restoring Israel to her former
condition of political sovereignty.
29This question, asked in the times of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, would have had reference to the
return of the ten northern tribes of Israel to the Land of Israel, and the return of the King-dom of
Judah to her former home in Judea and Jerusalem, with the reuniting of the two king-doms,
and the rebuilding of the Temple. But those promises of Jeremiah and Ezekiel had been
fulfilled in the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel, accompanied by the building of the
“Second Temple” in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah. However, Israel’s great joys of return
from captivity were soon forgotten as the returned captives found additional enemies overrun21
ning their land, and placing the nation in renewed slavery. First it was the Greek Seleucids,
the recipients of Alexander the Great’s empire, who swept over Israel from the north, placing
the nation once again in bondage--a bondage from which Israel experienced deliverance and a
“restoration of the Kingdom” under the Maccabees. But now the Kingdom of Israel had once
again been brought into servitude to another powerful nation of strangers--this time a people
from the west, the Romans. Rome had taken control of Israel under the iron fist of Pompey
and his Roman legions, reducing the proud Hasmonean (Maccabean) state to a much smaller
territory, under the control of the Roman puppet-rulers (eventually meaning Herod the Great, in
37 B.C.). Rome’s powerful troops were stationed throughout the land. It was the fervent
dream of her people--especially of the Zealots--that soon the promised New David would
come, to throw off the shackles of the Romans, and to “restore the Kingdom for Israel.”
We believe that the followers of Jesus are here pictured as asking him whether or not
the time had come for this to happen. It is a “geo-political” question, which refers specifically to
the time for overthrow of the Romans, in order to allow Israel to return to national sovereign-ty.
It is a most important question for Luke, as he writes the first (and in our view the greatest) of
the Christian “apologies”--a reasoned defense for the Christian faith and movement. He wants
his Roman readers (government officials, we believe) to know from the very first that the
Christians, and their movement, have been forbidden by their Lord from even considering such
geo-political matters. The rise and fall of earthly kingdoms is none of their concern--indeed,
that is God’s responsibility alone--and the followers of Jesus have been called to a quite
different task, that of witnessing to the Good News of God’s Word / Event in Jesus. It is a
“spiritual,” “religious” task that is theirs, not a political movement aimed at revolution! Here, we
see the deep rootedness of the Christian movement in the history of Israel and in its Bible.
See Endnote 1.
Haenchen took the question to mean something quite different--he understood them to
be asking concerning “the end of the world”! Noting the immediately preceding promise of the
Set-apart Spirit at Acts 1:5, Haenchen claimed that "The earliest Christians regarded the outpouring of the Spirit as a sign that the end of the world was at hand. With this in mind it is easy
to understand why they should ask, 'Is the kingdom coming now, at the same time as the
Spirit?' The question thus brings up the problem of the eschatological near-expectation, which
is however linked with a second problem: 'Is the kingdom restricted to Israel?' Here we have
the first mention of the problem of the Gentile mission, which will make itself felt again and
again in Acts, right up to 28:28." (p. 143)
Haenchen is reading a great deal into this question that is in fact not contained within it.
We ask, how did Haenchen know that the earliest Christians thought the outpouring of the
Spirit meant the "soon-coming end of the world"? Was not the outpouring of the Spirit the sign
of the rebirth of Israel, rather than of the "end of the world"? Compare Ezekiel 37-38, in which
the divine breathing of the Spirit is the sign of Israel’s resurrection and return from captivity and
the replacement of her former division by unity as one united people.
We think the question raised by the disciples is a very good question, one that is rooted
in this biblical teaching found in Ezekiel. Just as in Ezekiel, the prediction of the outpouring of
the Spirit in the Book of Joel (2:28-31) is followed by the coming of the Day of YHWH, and
following that, glorious, blessing-filled, long-lasting days for Jerusalem and for the Kingdom of
22
the Jews! The fact is, Haenchen's identification of the "coming of the Kingdom" with the "end
of the world" is misleading (reminding us of some of the views of Albert Schweizer), and totally
out of context in Luke's writings. Luke clearly teaches that the Kingdom of God is both present
and future (see footnote 18 on Acts 1:3!), and never, in either his Gospel or the Book of
Acts, does he use the phrase “end of the world”! No, the question of the disciples does not
have to do with the "end of the world," but rather, it has to do with the restoration of the Kingdom for Israel--quite a different matter--a geo-political matter! And, coming where it does in
the Book of Acts, at its very beginning, it sets the stage for much that is to follow. The people
of Jesus have no business in such geo-political questions. Their task, as Jesus will go on to
point out, is not that of rebellion against, or overthrow of, the Roman Government. Their task
is one of witnessing to all earth’s peoples concerning the reality of the risen Lord and his
spiritual Kingdom! That’s their business!
The New Jerusalem Bible comments on this question of Jesus' disciples that "The
apostles still expect the messianic kingdom to be the political restoration of David's dynasty."
(p. 1799) We agree--the question has to do with what follows the outpouring of the Spirit--is
that outpouring the herald of the soon-coming restoration of the Jewish Kingdom? That is
what the disciples are asking, according to Luke--not about the "end of the world"! The New
International Version Study Bible states that "Like their fellow countrymen, they were looking for the deliverance of the people of Israel from foreign domination and for the establishment of an earthly kingdom. The reference to the coming of the Spirit had caused them to
wonder if the new age was about to dawn." (p. 1644) That is, we think, a much more relevant
interpretation of Luke's meaning, although Luke mentions nothing concerning a "new age" in
their question. Taylor's Living Bible makes this interpretation of the New International Version Study Bible crystal clear: "They asked him, 'Lord, are you going to free Israel [from
Rome] now and restore us as an independent nation?'"
Conzelmann observed that "The problem raised here had already been discussed in
Luke's Gospel (17:20-21 [the Kingdom of God does not come with observation, but is already
in your midst!]; 19:11 [the belief that the Kingdom of God was soon to appear is rejected by
Jesus with his teaching in the parable of the pounds, which implies that there will be a long
time for faithful investment and labor before the Lord returns]; 21:5-36 [just as you can tell
when summer is coming from the blossoming of trees, so when you see the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, you can know that ‘the Kingdom of God is near’]). Luke
allows the disciples to formulate their question on the basis of Jewish assumptions in order to
correct them and to refuse absolutely any information about the date of the Parousia. The
Spirit makes it possible for the church to exist in the world for an indefinite period of time." (p.
6) But we insist that Conzelmann has simply assumed that Jesus' language has to do with the
Parousia--a Greek noun that basically means “presence,” literally “being with.” The fact is that
Luke never uses this noun; and therefore it should not be made determinative for exegesis of
Acts!
Conzelmann is right in observing that Luke has already discussed this matter--and in a
powerful way has shown that the Kingdom of God is both already present in human history, in
their midst, as well as coming in the future (see footnote 18 on Acts 1:3). Whatever we may
say about this question, we must remember that Luke, the author of Acts, has already discussed it in his Gospel, affirming both the present and future nature of the Kingdom of God, and
saying nothing concerning the parousia, or "the end of the world"! The same thing is true in
23
not for you people to know times or seasons31 which the Father has placed within his own
authority.32 (8) But rather,33 you people will receive power when the Set-apart Spirit has come
the Gospel of Mark!
30The Greek manuscript tradition has a number of variants for this first phrase in verse 7. The
four words in Greek are επεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, eipen de pros autous, “he said then to
them.” This is the wording of Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Psi, Minuscules 33, 1739 (a supplementary reading), the “Majority Text,” the Vulgate, and the Harclean Syriac. The order 1, 3,
4 (with omission of de) eipen pros autous, “he said to them,” is found in the first writer of Vaticanus and the Peshitta Syriac. Bezae and the majority of the Old Latin witnesses read kai
eipen pros autous, “and he said to them.” Ephraemi Rescriptus and E (Laudianus) read
ho de apokritheis eipen autois, “he then answering said to them.” A corrector of Vaticanus
reads eipen oun pros autous, ”he said therefore to them.” The majority of Western witnesses
do not follow Bezae at this point; it seems obvious that there was an early problem in the text,
and the later copyists and translators did their best to make sense of it in varying ways. None
of the variants, however, change the meaning of Luke’s narrative.
31Compare Matthew 24:36. The New Jerusalem Bible in its comment pays no heed to
Jesus' statement that knowledge concerning "times or seasons" does not belong to the
followers of Jesus, and launches out into a brief description of what those times and seasons
are, referring to the following scriptures: Daniel 2:21; 1 Thessalonians 5:1; Romans 16:2526; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:4; 3:9, 11; Colossians 1:26; 2 Timothy 1:9; Matthew
25:34; Hebrews 1:2; 9:9; 1 Peter 1:11; Acts 17:30; Romans 3:26; Galatians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 6:2; 1 Timothy 4:1; Romans 2:6; and 1 Corinthians 1:8. (p. 1799) In fact, however,
not one of these passages serves to reveal "times and seasons.” All that these passages tell
the reader is that God is at work, at his own times and seasons, and that we can be assured
that he is working on our behalf, revealing to us the great mystery of his love for Israel, and for
the nations as well, through King Jesus. Judgment is coming upon all--but there is no real
biblical way to set any chronological dates!
We have to add to this that every time Christian believers have thought that somehow
they have "found the key" for setting the time of the end (William Miller, Rutherford and Rus-ell,
the Armstrongs, and the NASA scientist who affirmed “88 reasons for the Rapture’s com-ing in
1988"), or for knowing the "times and seasons," they have without exception (thus far) been
absolutely wrong! No, God has reserved this matter of "times and seasons" for himself; he has
not placed it within our competence--and we will be very wise to stop asking such questions,
and rather, ask for our duty! So this passage in fact teaches! We are in the same position as
those earliest disciples--it is still not given to us to know times and seasons! What a blessing it
would be if we would all realize this fact of our limitation and ignorance--and quit building our
"dispensational schemes" and setting dates for the “end of time”! We can be
filled with faith and certainty that the Kingdom of God has come in the past, that it is coming in
the present (indeed is "near," even “present”!), and will come in the future with great power and
glory. But we cannot know or set times and seasons for the divine action! That’s not our
business!
32The risen Lord rejected the desire of his followers to enable them to set dates and times for
the restoration of Israel's Kingdom--saying that such earthly, geo-political matters belong to
God, not to them. See the preceding footnote. It was the conviction of the Zealots in first
century Israel (and of Bar Kochba in the second century) that they had discovered the time and
24
the season for geo-political action in order to free Israel from her Roman occupation. But the
interests and concerns of the followers of Jesus, as he is pictured by Luke as going on to state,
should be directed towards their own reception of power through the Set-apart Spirit, enabling
them to become witnesses for the risen Lord in Jerusalem, and its surrounding areas of Judea
and Samaria, and far beyond--to the end of the earth! That’s their business! What wisdom
there is in taking these words of Jesus deep into our hearts! Our job as “Disciples of Christ” is
to witness to God's saving love throughout the world--not to claim esoteric knowledge that we
do not have, or seek to be able to write up an appointment-calendar for our God, or especially
to claim that somehow our Christian knowledge makes us experts in political mat-ers, able to
set the time-table for revolution against earthly powers!
That God is at work in human history, bringing his purposes to fulfillment in the rise and
fall of nations, we need not doubt. That God will act, calling people to serve in the overthrow of
oppressive earthly governments, we need not doubt. But neither should we assume that God
has placed the knowledge of these things into our hands, or assigned us the task of
administering his program for history. The rise and fall of nations, such as the political restoration of Israel to sovereignty apart from the Romans, is God's concern--not ours! Our task is to
witness to what we have seen in Jesus! How important it is for us to understand this! This is
our task, this is our business! Rome needs to realize this too--the Christian movement poses
no threat to Rome--it is not an insurrection movement among the Jews with an agenda of
setting the date for restoring Israel to its national sovereignty! How important this is for the
apologetic intent of the Book of Acts! The divine time-table for geo-political matters is not
within the realm of the followers of Jesus’ expertise. They don’t know the times or the seasons for such things; in fact, it is none of their business! When they begin to get involved in
such questions, they are getting out of their realm of responsibility!
33Lake and Cadbury commented that "The disciples interpret the reappearance of Jesus as a
sign of the restoration of the Messianic Davidic Kingdom, but Jesus warns them that this is not
its meaning. They will receive the Spirit, not as members of the Kingdom, but in order to be
witnesses to Jesus...The Lucan tendency is to change the center of the preaching from the
future coming of the Kingdom to the already accomplished life of Jesus...The original hope of
the disciples was that the Kingdom was at hand in the Apocalyptic sense, but the Hellenistic
Christians, who in the end conquered the Empire, were preachers of the Lord Jesus, as having
a present importance for each individual apart from the eschatological King-dom in which he
would ultimately reign. In Acts we have ['the Kingdom of God'] and ['the things concerning
Jesus'] side by side, but the latter is replacing the former." (p. 8) What a puzzling comment!
Haenchen commented that "It is evident from this [forbidding of the asking of questions
concerning the Parousia] that Luke is the spokesman of a new age. He has decisively
renounced all expectation of an imminent end. Consequently the task has arisen of finding a
new relationship to this world in which, by God's inscrutable will, the Christians must continue
to live." (p. 141) But is this what this passage means? We think not! We are amazed at how
misleading these comments by Lake, Cadbury, and Haenchen are--in spite of our great admiration for their scholarship.
Lake and Cadbury's statement needs to be clarified by the fact that Luke never stated
that the disciples "were not members of the Kingdom." No, as we have seen in footnote 18 on
Acts 1:3, Luke taught that the disciples of Jesus were those who had entered into the Kingdom "like little children." They were disciples of the King, and were proclaimers and ambassadors of the Kingdom of God, who enabled the Kingdom of God to draw near wherever they
25
upon you;34 and you will be my witnesses35 both in Jerusalem, and [in]36 all the [country of]
preached and healed. The Kingdom of God was "within them," like leaven, wielding its powerful influence! But their present participation in the Kingdom of God was not by any means their
final goal--rather, that present, secret Kingdom would be the Kingdom of the future that would
certainly come, and in which their hopes would be fulfilled! For Luke, the Kingdom of God is
both a present reality, and a powerful hope for the future. Lake and Cadbury, however, along
with many other New Testament scholars, fail to hold these two together as does Luke. They
make it a matter of "Either \ Or" instead of Luke's "Both \ And." For Luke, being witnes-ses to
Jesus is the equivalent of "proclaiming the Kingdom of God"! These are not opposites, or
contradictories, as Lake and Cadbury's comment seems to imply.
Haenchen likewise has read far too much into the text of Acts that simply is not there-when he interprets it in terms of the Parousia, and an "imminent end." We find comments
such as these resulting in clouding over the text, rather than elucidating it! Careful study of the
New Testament documents will find both a "realized eschatology" (the Kingdom has arrived,
has drawn near in Jesus, and in the proclamation of his followers), and a "futuristic eschatology" (the Kingdom, even though having come, is still coming in the future, with great power
and glory!). We believe that it is the failure of these commentators to recognize this that has
caused them to make such misleading comments on this passage!
It is much better to understand the statement of Jesus to mean that just as he has
warned his disciples against seeking for miraculous signs, so he tells them here that the
setting of exact times and seasons (or "dates") concerning God's actions in history is completely out of their area of expertise. They are not called and commissioned to be foretellers of
the coming events of geo-political history--rather, they are to be witnesses of Jesus (and his
Kingdom) to the ends of the earth! This they are qualified to do! Only God can set the times
and seasons that have to do with the rise and fall of earthly kingdoms! They certainly cannot,
and should not!
Marshall observes that no direct answer is given to their question concerning times and
seasons, "...at least in terms of time. In language reminiscent of Mark 13:32 ["But concerning
that day, or the hour, no one knows--neither the heavenly messengers, nor the Son, but only
the Father!"], Jesus roundly states that the matter of the time of God's action is his own affair,
and it is not open to them to share his knowledge. Since this is God's secret, there is no place
for human speculation--a point that might well be borne in mind by those who still anxiously try
to calculate the probable course of events in the last days. Instead of indulging in wishful
thinking or apocalyptic speculation, the disciples must accomplish their task of being witnesses
to Jesus." (p. 60) We whole-heartedly agree--that’s our business!
34Lake and Cadbury noted that "It is to be noticed that the promise in Matthew that Jesus will
be with the disciples always (‘And lo! I am with you always,’ etc.) is replaced in Acts by the
promise of the Spirit." (p. 9) Here again we note the tendency of these scholars to say "Either
\ Or" when in fact it is much better to say "Both \ And"! In Acts, the Spirit is certainly present
with the disciples, but so is the risen Lord Jesus--see Acts 7:55, 59; 9:5 (22:8; 26: 15), 17, 34;
and 16:7. The Book of Acts nowhere says, or implies, that Jesus will no longer be with the
disciples, but his presence will be replaced by that of the Set-apart Spirit--not at all! Rather, it
teaches very explicitly that the disciples will never be left alone (as Matthew states), and that
both God himself, the Spirit of God, and Jesus, the risen Lord, will be with those follo-wers,
26
Judea, and in Samaria, and as far as the earth's end!"37
inspiring them, guiding them, protecting them, throughout their missionary future--until a
reading of that history will convince the reader that the expansion of Christianity all the way
from Jerusalem to Rome was not at all the human decision or choice of the disciples of Jesus-but rather, the action of God the Father, Jesus the King, and the Set-apart Spirit that has
empowered them! Compare Isaiah 32:15.
35Compare Acts 1:22; 5:32; Luke 24:48; John 15:26-7, and 1 Peter 5:1.
36In Greek the phrase ἐν πάσῃ, en pasei means the same thing as the simple dative form
πάσῃ, pasei. In the Greek manuscripts the evidence is fairly evenly divided between those
that have the preposition ἐν, en (P74, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, a corrector of Ephraemi
Rescriptus, E [Laudianus], Psi, Minuscules 33, 1739 [a supplementary addition], the “Majority Text,” and the Latin tradition), and those that read the simple dative πάσῃ (Alexandrinus, the first writer of Ephraemi Rescriptus, Bezae, Minuscules 81, 323, plus a few other
Greek manuscripts). Thus the translation “in” is placed in brackets, indicating uncertainty as to
whether or not to read it as in the original text. Whether or not it is read, however, makes no
difference for the meaning of Luke’s narrative.
37Here is the proper concern, and area of expertise, of the disciples of Jesus: to be his
witnesses throughout all the world, beginning from where they are, and continuing until every
nation and people on earth have heard the Good News! What a task the Church of Jesus is
given! It is nothing less than the task assigned the “Servant of YHWH” in Isaiah 49:6: “It is too
light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the
survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the
end of the earth (ἕως ἐσχάτου τς γς, heos eschatou tes ges, the identical phrase here in
Acts 1:8).” The end of the earth is not a chronological, but a missionary goal!
The New Jerusalem Bible translates "to earth's remotest end." (p. 1798) We have
observed that the Book of Acts could most appropriately be entitled "The Acts of the Set-apart
Spirit" (see footnote 10 on Acts 1:2). The divine Spirit is present among the disciples of the
risen Lord Jesus, imparting power for universal witness. Luke will depict the Spirit's major
work in terms of crossing over the barriers, opening new doors of opportunity, and strengthening the witnesses in their time of crisis and need. We agree with Bruce in his observation
that "An Old Testament prophet had called Israel to be God's witnesses in the world (Isaiah
43:10; 44:8); the task which Israel as a nation had not fulfilled was taken up by Jesus, as the
perfect Servant of the Lord, and passed on by Him to His disciples." (p. 39)
The New International Version Study Bible comments that verse 8 is "A virtual
outline of Acts: The apostles were to be witnesses in Jerusalem (chapters 1-7), Judea and
Samaria (chapters 8-9) and the ends of the earth--including Caesarea, Antioch, Asia Minor,
Greece and Rome (chapters 10-28). However, they were not to begin this staggering task
until they had been equipped with the power of the Spirit (verses 4-5)." (p. 1644) Lake and
Cadbury commented that "This passage (Acts 1:8) is the Lucan form of the Matthaean universal commission, 'Go into all the world and makes disciples of all the Gentiles.' Both passages reflect the tendency to give the authority of Jesus to practices which the disciples were in
reality driven to adopt only by stress of later circumstances...If Jesus really commanded the
apostles to preach to the Gentiles, would they have been so reluctant as Acts 6-15 proves that
they were?"
27
(9) And having said these things, while they are watching, he was lifted up38--and a
cloud received him39 from their sight.40 (10) And as they were looking intently41 into the
It is a good question, which we need to seek to answer. However, we note that Acts
1:8 says nothing concerning "the Gentiles," and it is a terribly naive view of religion to think that
once something is commanded, or mentioned, the people of God will henceforth live according
to that command or mention! Need we be reminded of Israel's proud claim in Exodus, "All that
YHWH has commanded, we will do!", over against their immediate building of the golden calf
in total disregard of the first and second commandments of the Decalogue? Should we not
remember the hundreds of years in which the Spokespersons of Israel labored in an almost
fruitless effort to get Israel to fulfill its promise? We respond to Lake and Cadbury by stating
that the disciples of Jesus, throughout the centuries, have in fact been almost as reluctant to
fulfill the covenant of their divine Lord and Master as the "Old Israel" was in the long ago! No,
the disciples of Jesus did not invent the universal mission--it was given them by their divine
Lord! If the Book of Acts teaches anything, it teaches that! The failure of the disciples to
understand and carry through with that mission is not because of their failure to be given the
task--it is their own hard-heartedness and stubborn failure to fulfill their Master's command!
Conzelmann commented on this verse that "By means of this outline the delay of the
Parousia is transformed into something positive in the course of salvation history." (p. 7) We
believe that Luke would say that the course of salvation history is the tangible proof of the
parousia--the presence of the risen Lord with his disciples, not only in their every present
experience, but also as the promise of his coming in the future! We are much more in accord
with Haenchen's comment when he stated that "As Acts presents it, the Christian Church is a
missionary Church. Hence the other problem posed by the disciples' question of verse 6 is
also resolved: the world-mission here decreed presupposes that salvation is not restricted to
Israel...The words of Jesus however have yet another implication. In laying down the course
of the Christian mission from Jerusalem to the 'end of the earth,' they also prescribe the content of Acts: the progress of the gospel from Jerusalem to Rome...It was the Lord himself who
pointed the way for the Church. The story of the Church is the history of divine salvation...This
word of Jesus, containing at once gift and obligation, is the last word he speaks on earth. It is
final and conclusive." (p. 144) Yes, “witnesses to earth’s farthest reaches”--that’s our
business!
38Compare John 6:62, where the verb ἀναβαίνω, anabaino (“go up”) is used. The verb here,
ἐπήρθη, eperthe, “he was lifted up,” is from epairo, “lift up.” Nowhere else in the Greek New
Testament is this verb used concerning the departure of Jesus from his disciples.
39The verb is ὑπέλαβεν, hupelaben, from hupolambanein, which means “receive as a
guest”; and then, “reply to something that has been said”; and finally, “assume,” “think,” “believe,” “be of the opinion (that), suppose.” A Greek-English Lexicon... has a separate category, “take up,” but this is the only passage where that meaning is supposed to be found in the
Greek New Testament, as if the word had a special meaning in this context. However, this is
unnecessary, and the verb, we think, should be understood simply as meaning “received.”
The only extra-biblical passage that is offered as illustrating this meaning is Josephus, Antiquities, XI, 238, which describes how King Artaxerxes, upon his wife Esther’s fainting in his
presence, ran to her, taking (hupolabon) her into his arms. To read into this verb here in Acts
28
heaven, while he is departing,42 and look43--two men stood beside them in white clothes,44 (11)
1:9 the idea of a “heavenly escalator” “taking Jesus up into the heavens” (as if the clouds were
not already in the heavens, but only a stairway or elevator to them!) is to read a great deal into
the text that simply isn’t there. The cloud “received” Jesus, surrounding him, making him no
longer visible to his followers, but that is all the text actually says.
The words that are found in the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts are:
εἰπὼν βλεπόντων αὐτν ἐπήρθη, καὶ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν, eipon bleponton auton
eperthe kai nephele hupelaben auton, “having spoken, while they are watching, he was
lifted up--and a cloud received him...” However, Vaticanus has a different order: eipon auton
bleponton eperthe kai nephele hupelaben auton, “having spoken, while they are watching,
he was lifted up and a cloud received him...” This change in word order is simply a matter of
“taste” or “style” in Greek writing, and makes no difference for the understanding of Luke’s
narrative. Bezae changes to eipontos autou nephele hupebalen auton kai aperthe, “while
he was speaking a cloud threw him (or, possibly, “instigated him,” or “substituted him”) and he
departed,” evidently a mistake in reading hupebalen instead of hupelaben. This variant
reading, instead of clarifying the text, only succeeds in confusing the reader!
40Literally, "from their eyes,” which means that the risen Lord Jesus was completely enveloped
in the cloud, and was no longer visible to their physical eye-sight. It does not mean that he
began going up, getting higher and higher, and finally disappearing from their sight! The New
Jerusalem Bible observes that "The cloud is part of theophanies in the Old Testa-ment." See,
for example, Exodus 13:22; 19; Daniel 7:13. In terms of biblical language, we may ask,
"Where is Jesus?" Answer: "He has been received by the clouds." "When, then will he
come?" "He is coming with the clouds." "How near is Jesus?" "He is as near as the clouds-always near us, mysteriously, untouchable and invisible in a physical way, but none-theless
surrounding us, coming to our help (and to our discipline)! He is no longer visible to our
physical sight; but he is still always present, near us, visible to the eyes of faith!"
We insist that the background of this language is to be found in the Jewish Bible (the
“Tanach”) and its teaching concerning YHWH God as the "Rider of the Clouds," the "Lord of
History," who has come in every past, who comes in every present, and who will come in every
future. Since Jesus is the embodiment of YHWH's salvation, he too is the Rider of the Clouds!
This is quite a different thing from claiming that Jesus, who was once here on earth, present
with us, is now gone from us, and will only come again in a “second coming” in the distant
future! It is to claim that the physical presence of Jesus, in one geographical location and at
one specific time, is no longer with us. Rather, his “spiritual presence” surrounds us, and can
become manifest at any time, and in any geographical location in the universe!
Bezae understands the text to say that a cloud covered Jesus on earth, before his
ascending, and then, after being enveloped by the cloud, he ascended--perhaps, as Plooj
thinks, in an attempt to avoid attempts to take the text too literally, and to surround it with
mystery--see Metzger, p. 282.
41Or, perhaps, "staring." The Greek verb atenizein means "to look intently at something" or "gaze at." It comes from the word atenes which means "strained tight," or "intent,"
"direct."
42The phrase “into the heaven” can be construed with the followers of Jesus’ “looking intently
into the heaven,” or can (perhaps) also be construed with the following participle, “as he is
29
who also said, "Men--Galileans45--why have you stood46 (here), looking [intently] into the
heaven?47This Jesus who has been taken up48 from you people into the heaven49 in this way50
departing into the heaven” (compare the language of 1 Peter 3:22). The first construc-tion
seems much more natural to the Greek.
43We think this language, “and look...” is a “Septuagintalism,” reflecting Luke’s acquain-tance
with, and being influenced by, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Oftentimes in
Hebrew the phrase occurs, wehinneh (“and look!”), which is translated into the Greek by kai
idou, the phrase Luke uses here, some 17 times in the Gospel of Luke, and at least 6 times
in the Book of Acts (the simple idou 57 times in Luke, and 23 times in Acts).
44Compare Luke 24:4 and 2 Maccabees 3:26. There is a variant spelling of “white clothes” in
the Greek manuscripts, the majority using the plural (a corrector of P56, Sinaiticus,
Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, the first writer of Ephraemi Rescriptus, Psi, Minuscules 81, 323,
945, 1175, a few other Greek manuscripts, the Latin tradition, and Eusebius of Caesarea [d. c.
339 / 340]), but others using the singular (the first writer of P56 [probably], a corrector of Ephraemi Rescriptus, Bezae, E (Laudianus), Minuscules 33, 1739 [see--a supplementary
addition], the “Majority Text,” plus the Old Latin manuscript gig, and the Syriac tradition). The
difference in reading makes no difference for the understanding of Luke’s narrative.
Luke does not call these two men "angels" or “messengers.” It seems obvious to many
readers (because of their white clothing) that Luke means them as "heavenly messengers,"
non-divine, but super-human beings who operate in human history for the fulfillment of the
purposes of God, especially for the aid of his people. But in fact, Luke describes them as “two
men,” and it seems rather foolish to think that being dressed in white automatically means that
the “two men” were in fact “heavenly messengers.” Cannot two men, dressed in white, serve
as heavenly messengers, without ceasing to be “men”? And cannot God use men and women
to serve as his messengers?
45The address is “male oriented,” and is the first of many such addresses to be found
throughout the Book of Acts. Here, the New Revised Standard Version, which has attempted to eliminate male-oriented language as much as possible, still translates “Men of Galilee.”
See Acts 1:16 (with its footnote 72) where New Revised Standard Version translates “Men,
brothers” by “Friends.”
46The verb ἑστήκατε, hestekate is the 2nd person plural, perfect indicative of histemi.
47Greek manuscripts are fairly evenly divided between reading the simple blepontes “looking”
(P74 [probably], the first writer of Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, E (Laudianus), Minus-cules 33, 81,
323, 945, 1241, 1505, 1739 [a supplementary reading], some other Greek man-uscripts, plus
Eusebius of Caesarea [d. 339 / 340 A.D.]) or the compound form emblepontes, “looking
intently” (P56, a corrector of Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi Rescriptus, Bezae, Psi,
and the “Majority Text”). The variant makes no difference for Luke’s meaning.
The Cuban Roman Catholic Cardinal Jaime Ortega commented on this text in Acts
during his visit to Miami, Florida on May 28, 1995, stating that there are two different mentalities with regards to the role of the Church of Jesus in the world [one advocating a “geopolitical role for the Church,” the other advocating an exclusively “spiritual” role]: "This was a
stone of stumbling for the disciples of Jesus. They had to make a great change in the following of Christ, to leave behind, at one side, each one of them, his own personal ways:
Peter, his impetuousness, Jacob his calculations, Thomas his incredulity, all of them their fear,
30
their lack of understanding that the reign of Christ is not of this world. How many new values
they would have to incorporate into their lives! How hard it would have been for any one of
them, that education in the school of love, when they tried to put limits to forgiveness, and
asked the Master the number of times that they would have to pardon their brother. How
impatient and lacking in faith the other disciple who said to the Lord, ‘Don't speak to us any
longer of the Father, demonstrate it to us, and it will be enough.’ How interested they were
who discussed among themselves concerning the positions that they would occupy in the
Kingdom! Even in the same moment before ascending into the heaven, they were asking
Jesus when he was going to restore the sovereignty of Israel. They were talking politics!
"Two mentalities, two languages, two distinct explanations of the world and of history:
one earthly, human, if you desire, necessary; the other, that of the man who ascends into the
heavens, sublime like He himself, indispensable for the man and for the woman of faith, which
causes us to raise our vision to that which is above, not to remain standing looking into the
heaven, but so that everything earthly may remain placed in its true dimension; so that we may
not speak only, or always, nor in the first place, the language of the interests, of the tastes, or
preferences, of our own criteria, characteristic of this world with a closed horizon, which is that
of the human being without reference to God. In his Letter to the Ephesians Paul prays 'that
the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of profound knowledge and revelation in order to know him. That he may illumine the eyes of your heart, so that
you may understand what is the hope to which he is calling you...' This prayer, I now make my
own for the Cuban people, both here [in dispersion] and there [in Cuba].
"It is through knowing this that there opens before our eyes new perspectives, and we
are returned to the joy of living. 'They returned to Jerusalem with great joy and were constantly in the Temple blessing God.' The heavenly messengers told them that they should not
remain standing there, gazing into the heaven; and they returned to look at the earth--but now
with other eyes. No one who has truly fixed his attention on Jesus Christ can return to contemplate life continuing in the habitual way of seeing those things that are encountered.
Because this Jesus, whom you now see departing, will come again. And when the Son of God
comes with his heavenly messengers, he will gather all human beings and will call to his right
hand those whom He will proclaim 'blessed by my Father,' and will invite them to possess the
Kingdom, because I was hungry, and you people gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave
me drink; I was naked, and you dressed me, sick and in the prison, and you came to see me...
And, when, Lord, did we see you in this way, and help you? Each time that you did it to one of
these, the smallest ones, you did it to me."
In this way, Cardinal Ortega understands the Book of Acts to be teaching its readers to
take the "higher view" of life and of history--to look at our world, and its geo-political fortunes,
with the eyes of faith, trusting the ascended Lord and entering into his joy, rather than losing
our lives in the political confusion and upheavals that surround us. What do you think? Is
Ortega correct? Or is this little more than an "escape mechanism," that causes the Christian
believer to "gaze into heaven" and overlook the terrible injustices of a Fidel Castro (or an
Adolph Hitler)? Is he guilty of doing what Marx and Lenin charged religion with, substituting
justice here and now for "pie in the sky, in the sweet bye and bye"? We must note that Ortega
doesn't ask believers to turn away from this world--but rather, in the light of this heavenly
vision, to return to this world of suffering and hurt, with the eyes of compassion and of love.
What do you think?
31
will come,51 just as you observed him going into the heaven."52
In terms of the first century, what would Roman readers think of this statement? Would
it not help them to see that the Christian movement posed no threat to Rome, and that its
aspirations were truly "spiritual," not “geo-political” in nature? We think that this is what Luke
intends for his readers to understand! How many a congregational leadership in this twentieth
century, faced with deep and massive social change all around them (such as the coming of
people from other cultures and languages into their neighborhoods) have looked at what is
happening to them simply in the light of political realities--of demographics, and class distincions--and have decided to "move to the suburbs," or to find a neighborhood more to their liking.
How many of those leaders have decided that "money talks," that the only thing that
counts in church life is "power and control," speaking in political rather than in spiritual terms!
But the followers of Jesus who have seen the Lord ascending into heaven, and who return to
their church in the light of that vision, can see everything in a quite different light, and with a
clearer vision. They will understand what is happening to them as "the mission fields coming
to us," and will see, instead of "closed doors," wide open doors of opportunity. Ortega is right-it all depends on the kind of eyes with which we see! This passage in Acts can have power-ful
influence upon its readers if we understand it in this way!
48The phrase ὁ ἀναλημφθεὶς, ho analemphtheis, “the one having been taken up,” is the
aorist passive participle from analambano, which means literally “to take up again,” or
“resume”--but does not emphasize any direction. For example, it is used of carrying a tent, or
weapons; it is used of “taking to oneself,” “adopting”; it is used of “taking along” a traveling
companion; it is also used of “taking in hand,” i.e., books. The prefixed ana- has the sense
“again,” rather than “up.” For the use of this verb analambanein in the Book of Acts, see 1:2
(with its footnote 13), 11 (here), 22; 7:43; 10:16; 20:13, 14; and 23:31.
49The phrase εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν, eis ton ouranon, “into the heaven,” is omitted by Bezae,
Minuscule 2495, a few other Greek manuscripts, the Old Latin manuscripts gig, the first writer
of t, some manuscripts of the Vulgate, and also some manuscripts of the Bohairic Coptic (see
Metzger, p. 283). It could be that this variant is an attempt by later copyists and translators to
eliminate the kind of literalism that oftentimes accompanies this language; how-ever, the
omission does not significantly change the meaning of Luke’s narrative, for the same phrase,
“into the heaven” immediately follows at the close of this verse.
50The phrase ὃν τρόπον, hon tropon means “in the manner in which,” or “just as.” The
witnesses have just observed Jesus being enveloped in a cloud, disappearing from their sight,
being “received or taken up into the heaven.” He will come in this same way, in the manner in
which he disappeared--i.e., he will come “with the clouds,” he will be seen coming out of the
clouds, making himself once more visible to the human eye. The later use of kathos, “just as,”
re-emphasizes the similarity between his departure and his coming. Luke teaches his readers
that the risen Lord is the one “coming with the clouds”!
51The Greek verb is ἐλεύσεται, eleusetai, the future indicative of the verb erchomai which
means “to come,” or “to go,” or even “to appear.” This is the only place in Acts where this
future verb occurs. Elsewhere (see Luke 21:21) this same verb erchomai is used in its
present participle form, as ho erchomenos, “the coming one.”
The New Jerusalem Bible comments on these words that they mean "The glorious
coming, the parousia..." (p. 1799) But Luke never once uses this word parousia, which has
become such a favorite technical term for those who dwell on "eschatology," the "things con32
cerning the end of time" (nor do Mark, or John use this word--only Matthew!) The same
observation can be made with reference to the Book of Revelation--this noun parousia never
occurs in it either, just as it never occurs in Luke or Acts, or Mark, or John! It seems strange
that such a key-term, said to describe the central content of biblical hope, is never used by
these authors, and has to be read into their documents in order to be found! We think it much
more likely that this statement refers to the constant "coming with the clouds," throughout
human history, by the "Son of Humanity," who is the "Lord of History"--and who comes to his
people's aid, and in judgment over their oppressors, in every time and place. He "comes with
the clouds," just as the Jewish Bible constantly reiterates, whenever human injustice calls for
his coming, or his suffering people need his rescue! Where will this risen Lord be? He will
always be mysteriously present and coming, just like the clouds of heaven! We agree with
Bruce’s comment that "Christ is ascended, but His abiding presence and energy fill the whole
Book of Acts, and the whole succeeding story of His people on earth. His presence at God's
right hand means that He is more effectually present with His people on earth 'all the days,
even unto the consummation of the age' (Matthew 28:20)." (p. 42)
52Lake and Cadbury commented that "The author of Acts says that the parousia will be 'in like
manner.'" (p. 9) But as we have just noted, Luke does not use this noun parousia either here,
or anywhere else in his Gospel, or the Book of Acts. Besides that fact, we must emphasize
that the noun means something quite different from what Christian dictionaries find in it. It is in
fact the combination of two Greek words, para, “with,” and ousia, “being.” It means simply
“presence,” i.e., “being with.” And, in fact, that is what the New Testament documents unite in
telling their readers--that the risen Lord Jesus is always “with his people,” "present" with them
here and now, in human history, and “present” with them in the future, as the great Lord of
History whose purposes will be triumphant in the long march of time!
We take Luke to mean that the form of the risen Lord's presence was changing; he
would no longer be present with them physically and geographically, in one place, but not in
another. Rather, he was being caught up into a mysterious, "other," "heavenly" dimension,
from which he would be able to see his suffering people at their most critical moments, able to
always be with them, in any and every place on earth, constantly reaching out to receive them
in death, and able to heal them in their times of need. He would now be fully able to appear on
a road to Damascus, to a hated persecutor of his people. It is something quite mysterious
that Luke is describing, quite different from the modern imaginative picture of his being absent
from this earth, and his people, until one final coming at the end of time!
Marshall makes the interesting observation that "Luke alone describes the ascension of
Jesus as a visible event, although the fact of the ascension is firmly attested elsewhere (1
Timothy 3:16; 1 Peter 3:21-22), especially in the many passages where the resurrection of
Jesus is understood to be not simply his raising from death but also his exaltation to the right
hand of God (2:33-35)...The historicity of the scene has been strongly questioned by scholars
who hold that Luke has created a dramatic representation of the theological truth of the exaltation of Jesus [e.g., Lohfink, Die Himmelfahrt Jesu (Muenchen, 1971)]. There are of course
difficulties if we interpret the story over-literally and draw from it the concept of a heaven 'up
there' somewhere in space [the kind of view so stereotyped and criticized by Rudolph Bultmann and his followers--including the Russian cosmonauts!]. The story is rather like those of
the creation of the world or of the incarnation of Jesus or of his resurrection, in which events
that bring together the transcendent reality of God and the physical world--and which therefore
cannot be described fully in terms and categories that belong to the latter--are expressed in a
33
symbolical, pictorial manner. The symbolism of 'ascension' expresses the way in which the
physical presence of Jesus departed from this world, to be replaced by his spiritual presence.
To say this is obviously not to deny the factuality or historicity of what happened, but to admit
that what happened lies beyond simple, literal description. It is in this kind of way that the story
of the ascension of Jesus is best understood." (pp. 59-60)
With this understanding of the meaning of the word parousia, as meaning the eternal
presence of the risen Lord with his people, we can agree with Marshall’s final comment that
"Thus the promise of the parousia [i.e., always being present] forms the background of hope
against which the disciples are to act as the witnesses to Jesus." (p. 62) We believe that the
background of this kind of statement is the Jewish Bible's presentation of YHWH, the "Lord of
History," who has come, and who comes, and who will come "with the clouds," exercising his
divine judgment and mercy and deliverance on behalf of his people throughout history (as well
as at the close of history)! The risen Lord will never forsake his people, but will always be with
them!
Endnote 1, The Rootedness of the Christian Movement in Israel and the Jewish Bible
In the following footnotes we discuss the deep roots of the Christian movement in Israel
and in its Bible: 29 on 1:6; 37 on 1:8; 40 on 1:9; 43 on 1:10; 52 on 1:11; 68 on 1:15; 91 and 92
on 1:20; 93 on 1:21; 2 on 2:1; 9 and 13 on 2:2; 19 on 2:3; 36 and 38 on 2:7; 83 and 84 on
2:16; 99 on 2:21; 119 on 2:25; 127 on 2:29; 132 on 2:30; 142 on 2:33; 146 on 2:34; 162 on
2:38; 171 and 174 on 2:39; 180 on 2:40; 32 on 3:8; 46 on 3:10; 65 and 66 on 3:13; 89 on
3:17; 91 on 3:18; 106 and 107 on 3:22; 21 on 4:5; 46 on 4:11; 93 on 4:24; 96 and 97 and 98
on 4:25; 98 on 4:26; 5 on 5:2; 12 on 5:3; 32 on 5:7; 41, 43 and 44 on 5:9; 52 on 5:11; 90 on
5:19; 96 and 98 on 5:20; 113 on 5:25; 125 and 126 on 5:28; 134 and 137 on 5:30; 4 on 6:1; 9
on 6:2; 15 on 6:3; almost the entirety of chapter seven, so deeply rooted in the Jewish Bible
as Stephen tells the story of Israel’s history of rebellion; 50 on 8:21; 56 and 58 on 8:23; 3 on
8:26; 6 on 9:2; 8 on 9:3; 31 on 9:13; 33 on 9:15; 7 on 9:31; 26 on 10:4; 40 on 10:11; 48 and
49 on 10:14; 89 on 10:31; 98 on 10:34; 100 on 10:35; 107 on 10:36; 13 on 11:21; 19 on
11:22; 85 on 12:22; 86 on 12:23; 48, 52 and 54 on 13:10; 55 and 59 on 13:11; 74 on 13:16;
163 on 13:46; 53 on 15:10; 75 and 76 on 15:15; 26 on 16:1; 88 on 16:16; 106 on 17:24; 110
on 17:25; 115 on 17:26; 123 and 125 on 17:27; 129 and 133 on 17:29; 138 on 17:30; 140 and
141 on 17:31; 28 and 29 on 18:6; 48 and 49 on 18:9; 87 on 18:18; 1 on 19:1; 29 and 31 on
19:9; 47 and 50 on 20:10; 83 on 20:20; 94 on 20:22; 116 on 20:26; 122, 125, 126, and 127 on
20:28; 144 and 145 on 20:32; 1 on 21:1; 39 on 21:11; 29 on 22:6; 61 and 65 on 22:17; 80 on
22:22; 17 on 23:3; 20 on 23:5; 53 on 23:12; 55 and 57 on 24:14; 27 on 25:8; 24 and 25 on
26:6; 35 on 26:10; 56, 57 and 60 on 26:17; 62 on 26:18; 72 on 26:20; 78 on 26:22; 79 on
26:23; 50 on 27:9; 33 on 28:8; 39 on 28:9; 72 on 28:17; 105 on 28:23; 118 on 28:27; and 121
on 28:28. These footnotes only begin to point to the pervasive influence of the Jewish Bible
throughout the Book of Acts!
34