Acts 1:1-3

Our study on Acts was begun in August of 2006 in the Pacesetter's class at Central Valley Baptist Church in Meridian, Idaho. This and other postings I will make on Acts are a sampling of the lessons presented. My family and I have since left that church but I'm certain that the Pacesetter's remain faithful to the teaching of the Word of God.

***********************************************************

The book of Acts was written by Luke as a sequel, if you will, to the gospel that bears his name. It is believed that it was written around A.D. 63, about 30 years after the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ.

What is the book of Acts about?

The first answer to that is that Acts is the record of what the apostles did after the gift of the Holy Spirit was given to the Church.

Donald Grey Barnhouse, one of the commentators I am using for this study, says that the book of Acts, rather than the acts of the Apostles, should be better known as “The Acts of the Holy Spirit” “because the things God did through the apostles were in reality the acts of the Holy Spirit through those who were the Lord’s chosen for His purposes.”
I tend to agree with Barnhouse because I see this book as being primarily the story of how God gave birth to His church on earth and how He made it grow and spread through the teachings of the apostles, who were empowered by the Holy Spirit. We will see throughout the book how God carefully seeds His Body, bringing to it many converts.

Read Acts 1:1-3

Re: verse 1)
As mentioned above, we know that Luke was the author of this book, and that Luke was also the author of the gospel that bears his name, and we also know that he wrote both books to Theophilus (compare Acts 1:1 with Luke 1:1-4) in order to explain to him the many wonderful things he knew about Jesus.
Although Theophilus was a real person, some commentators believe the book of Acts was intended for a wider audience than just the one man bearing the name. They take pains to point out that the name Theophilus is derived from the Greek words theos and phileo, the first meaning God and the second meaning to love. Therefore, it is said, the name of Theophilus meant “God lover” or “lover of God.” This, then, really refers to all Believers…to all Christians…for those of us who bear that name are by definition lovers of God. We love God.
Even so, it is a beautiful interpretation but the fact remains that the context of the passage is clear that this is a letter being written to a man named Theophilus, a man to whom Luke has already sent one letter…the Gospel.

Re: verses 2 & 3)
As with the gospel that bears his name, Luke wrote Acts in order that Theophilus might believe and have his faith confirmed! Notice how he explains that he will tell him all that Jesus had done while alive and then what Jesus did after the resurrection! He clearly states that there were infallible proofs to the resurrection of the Lord! This is important to note because were these proofs not infallible, then Theophilus would easily be able to rebuke Luke. But Luke is confident of his message, as he should be.
Likewise, brothers and sisters, our message to the world is an infallible message. Proclaim it without shame and without hesitation because the success of the message we take to the world does not rest on our ability to properly transmit it! The success of the message lies within itself! Our task is to tell others the message of our risen Savior, to call people to repentance of sin and submission to Jesus as Lord and Savior…God will do the rest!
How true it is that “the Word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Hebrews 4:12

Now then, before moving on to other verses, I want us to focus special attention on the verse about the apostles…
"the apostles whom He had chosen"
When I first started coming to this church, I remember being surprised to hear a man among us referred to as an apostle…I understood what the pastor meant but remember feeling some unease about it. Later on, in a discussion in Sunday school, we talked about apostles today and how we all fit into the definition of apostle.
I want to tell you today that that is both true and it is false.
It is true because the word apostle is the Greek apostolos, which means delegate or messenger of the gospel. All of us, in this sense of the word, are apostles.

But at the same time, the Scriptures clearly teach that Apostle is also an office. In fact, Strong’s concordance includes the first two definitions but adds that the word also was used officially to designate those commissioned by Christ who were known by their workings of miracles.
Therefore, the statement that we are all apostles is also false because only a select few were ever in the position of Apostles of Christ.
Again, many people use the word and apply it to anyone who spreads the Gospel...who teaches the Bible. They use the term in this general way because they believe that since we are all delegates of Christ and witnesses of Him, then we are all technically apostles.
HOWEVER...the Bible does recognize a particular group of men who are referred to as Apostles in the sense of a special relationship and job that they had.

The word apostles (plural) is used over 50 times in the NT, the singular version apostle is used only 19 times. When used in the singular, it always refers to one of those whom Jesus had called or to Paul and/or Matthias. In the plural, it always refers to that select group mentioned above and never to the followers of Christ as a whole.
Those whom the apostles commission and send out are not also known as apostles…and in 2 Peter 3:1-2 we see that apostleship came with the authority to teach and introduce doctrine, for their teachings were inspired…I cannot introduce doctrine to you. I have no authority with which to do so. But the chosen delegates who held the office of an Apostle did have that authority which was confirmed by the workings of miracles.

Can we have such an office holder today? The answer is no. For remember that in 1 Corinthians 9:1 Paul asks the rhetorical question, “Am I not an apostle?” Part of the reason he give for his authority is that he is one who had “seen Jesus.” The Apostles, therefore, were those who had seen Jesus…they were given to the church to help establish it…to be used by the Holy Spirit for the work of giving birth and direction to the church. Since no man since then can claim to have seen Jesus, there can be no Apostles today. At least not in the biblical sense of the word.

Questions or comments?