ACTS OF THE APOSTLES : The Book that give the history of early Christianity from the Ascension of Christ to the end of two years of Paul Imprisonment in Rome. I. TITLE OF THE BOOK:  An early MS has the Title  “ACTS” ( GK. Praxeis, “doings, transactions, achievements”). Others early titles are “Acts Of the Apostles”, The Acts Of the Apostles,”  “Acts Of the Holy Spirit.” The book however narrates actions and speaches chiefly Of Peter and Paul. There is some information about Judas Iscariot ( Acts 1:16-20 ), the man chosen to suceed him ( 1:21-26 ). JOHN THE APOSTLE ( 3:1-4:31; 8:14-17) and John’s Brother James ( 12:12 ). The Twelves except the betrayer, are listed in 1:13. Acts is not a history of all the Apostles rather it is a selection from the deeds and the words of some who illustrate the progress Of first century Christianity i thos phases that intrested the Author as he was moved by the Holy Spirit. The Title “ACTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT” has often been suggested and the contens of the book bear out the appropriateness of such a title. II. AUTHOR : Not until AD 160 -200 do we have positives staments as to the Authorship of Acts . From that time Onward, all who mention the subject agree that the two books dedicated to THEOPHILUS ( Luke and Acts ) were written by luke, the beloved Physician.” Only in modern times have there been attempts to ascribe both books to TITUS or some other author. see LUKE, LUKE, GOSPEL OF. By writing “We” instead of “They” in recounting events whenhe was present, the author indicates that he was a companion of Paul. Luke evidently join paul, SILAS, AND TIMOTHY at TROAS during the second Missionary Journey and accompanied them to PHILIPPI but did not go on with them when they left there( Acts 16:10 – 17). The Author next indicates that he was in Philiippi towards the end of the third missionary journey, when Paul was about to Sail for Palestine with the contribution of the Gentile Churches for the poor at Jerusalem ( 20:6 et. al.) We do not know whether Luke spent all the interval at Philippi. From this point Luke accompanie Paul to JERUSALEM (Acts 20:6 – 21:18). Nor do we know how Luke spent the two years during which Paul was Impressioned at CAESAREA, but luke enter the narrative again in 27:1 ( “when it was decided that we should sail for Italy”), he continued with Paul, giving us a vivid account of the voyage to Rome. Acts break off abrutly at the end of Paul two years of ministry in Rome, when he was enjoying the relative freedom of “his own rented house” where he “Welcome all who came to see him. Boldly and with out hindrance he preached the Kingdom of God ans taught about the Lord Jesus Christ” ( 28:30 – 31). If a later wrier had incorporated these “we” sections he would have name their author to enhance their authority. But the style of the “We” passages can not be distinguished fromthe style of the rest of the Acts nor fromthat of Luke gospel. The Author Of Luke and Acts is the Author of the “We” section Of Acts and a Companion of Paul. The question remains: Which of the Companions of Paul is the Authors of Acts? He cannot be one of those referred to by Name in the “We” section as distinct from the Author. He is not likely to have been one of those named in Paul’s letters written at times other than  those included in the “We” sections. Of those named in Paul letters written when the “We” author might have been with Paul, early Christians writers chose “Our dear Friend Luke, the doctor ( Col. 4:14 ). Luke is not Otherwise prominent in the New Testament. Why should he have been chosen, unless he was the Author? The Medical Language in Acts is not sufficent to prove that the Authir was a Physician, but it is sufficient to conform other evidences of that effect. Luke was with Paul shortly before the Apostle’s expected death( 2 Timothy 4:11 ). Luke can not be certainly identified with two of hristians named LUCIUS ( Acts 13:1; Romans 16:21 ). There is wild and Ancient Suppport for connecting Luke with with ANTIOCH IN  SYRIA. It is not probably that he was from PHILIPPI. The tradition that he was a Painter  can not be traise early than the Tenth Century. From 2 Corinthians 8:18 it is possible to infer that TITUS was Luke Brother and tht Luke “was the brother who is praised by all the Churches for his service to the gospel.”  TITUS and LUKE are name together in 2 Timothy 4:10-11. The Conjecture that Luke was the “Man Of Macedonia” Of Paul Vision ( Acts16:9 ) is attractive and inherently possible but not certain.

III. Place. The Place where ACTS was written is not named, though the sudden ending of the book, while Paul is residing at Rome awaiting trial, makes Rome an approprite choice. The question of place is tied in with that of Luke’s purpose in writing and with the occassion for the publication of the book. IV. Date. Allusions to ACTS in the APOSTOLIC FATHERS are too indefinate to compel the setting of a date much before the end of the first century. If ACTS is dependent oj Josephus for information, It can not be ealier than 93. But such dependent is not proved and is highly unlikely. Acts must have been finished after the latest date mentioned in the Book ( ACTS 28:30 ). The abrupt close indicates that it was writtenat the time, C. 61 or 62. Lukes Gospel has an appropriate ending; Acts does not. We are not told how the trials of Paul came out. There is no hints of Paul release or of his death. The attitude towards Roman Official is friendly and that would not have been the case after the persecution under Nero in 64. The Jewish war of 66 and 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem are not refer to. Chapter 1-15 accurately picture conditions in Jerusalem before it destruction. It would be attractive to think that Luke’s two books were written to inform and influence well – disposed Romans officials in their handeling of Paul case. V. The Speeches In Acts. Do the speeches report what was actually said? We do not expect stenographic reporting, but Luke is a careful writer, as a comparison of his Gospel with Mark and Matthew shows. The style of the speeches in ACTS is not luke’s, but that which is appropriate to each speaker whether Peter, Stephen, Paul, or even the minor characters such as Gamaliel ( Acts 5:34-39 ), the Ephesian town clerk ( 19:35-40 ), and Tertullus ( 24:2-8 ). Similarities between the speeches between the speeches of Peter and Paul are explained by the fact that Paul explicitly preached the same Gospel as Peter did. Speeches by the same person are varied in type, each suited to the occassion. VI. Contents. Introduction. (1) Summary of ground coveredby the “former treatise” especially the resurrection ministry of Jesus, ACTS 1:1-11. (2) The period of waiting; a Ten Day prayer meeting in the Upper Room, ACTS 1:12-14. (3) The Choice of a Successor to the betrayer as one of the Twelve, ACTS 1:15-26. A. The Day of Pentcost, the birth day of the Church. (1) The occassion and the event, ACTS 2:1-13 (2) Peter’s Sermon, ACTS2:14-36. (3) The results : the beginning of the Church, ACTS 2: 37-47. B. Pictures of the First Church in Jerusalem. (1) A Lame Man Heal, ACTS 3:1-11. (2) Peter’s Sermon to the Crowd on this occasion, ACTS 3:12-26. (3) Attempted suppression of the New Church prayer power, ACTS 4:1-30. (4) A contrast in givers, ACTS 4:31 – 5:11: Barnabas, the generous giver, ACTS 4:31-37, and Ananias and Sapphira, the grudging giver, ACTS 5:1-11. (5) Growth of the Healing Ministry of the Church, ACTS 5:12-16. (6) Another attempt at Suppression of the Church met by obedience to God, ACTS 5:17-42. (7) An Administrative problem solved leads to further advance, ACTS 6:1-8. (8) The attempt of the Council         ( Sanhedrian)  to supress the new Leader, Stephen, ACTS 6:19-15. (9) Stephen’s defense, ACTS 7:1-53. (10) Stephen’s martydom, ACTS 7:54-60.