ACTS:
EXPANSION OF THE EARLY CHURCH
Jerusalem Temple Mount
By
Jim Gerrish
Light of Israel Bible Commentaries
All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from: The Holy Bible: New International Version®, NIV®, Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by the International Bible Society. Used with permission.
Copyright © Jim Gerrish 2019
INTRODUCTION
When we come to the Book of Acts we are looking at the second volume of an original work that was made up of Luke and Acts. Somewhere in the early Second Century, the four canonical gospels were gathered together into a single collection and were circulated independently as the fourfold gospel. The second book was then given the name “The Acts of the Apostles” and was circulated separately.1
By long-standing tradition and abundant historical witness, the author of Acts, and what came to be the Gospel of Luke, is none other than Luke himself.2 We know that Luke was a Gentile (cf. Col. 4:10, compared to 12-14).3 We also know he was a physician (Col. 4:14) and an educated person, as his superb writing clearly illustrates. He was in fact the only Gentile writer in the New Testament. Luke, who was probably from Antioch, began to work closely with the apostle Paul. This close connection is illustrated by the so-called “We Sections” of Acts (cf. Acts 16:10-17; 20:5 – 21:18; 27:1 – 28:16). In these sections the narrative is in first person plural form indicating that Luke was present and was an eyewitness.4
Luke addresses both of his works to one Theophilus, who seemed to be either a Gentile convert to Christianity or one who was greatly interested in the faith. The title “most excellent” (Lk. 1:3) seems to indicate that he was a person of distinction. Later in Acts, this title is accorded to the Roman governors of Judea (Acts 23:26; 26:25).5
The clear purpose of both books was to present an accurate account of the things that had transpired concerning the life and ministry of Jesus before he was taken up to heaven (Luke) and his work afterward (Acts). It is evident that Luke had conducted a careful examination of these events (Lk. 1:3) so that he could write an orderly account for Theophilus.6
In Acts, Luke’s purpose is not just to write an account detailing the expansion of the Christian church. “In other words, Luke is telling a story, not writing a ‘history.’ His story is that of the main outlines of the extension of the church from Jerusalem to Rome via Samaria, Antioch, Asia, and Europe.” 7 We notice that he does not tell of the church’s expansion in Galilee, Egypt, in North Africa, Mesopotamia and other places. His purpose is to show how Christianity reached Rome, the capital of the known world. The Bible specialists Kenneth Barker and John Kohlenberger III say, “The gospel had reached its culmination when it reached Rome, the capital of the Gentile world. And with that victory accomplished, Luke felt free to lay down his pen.” 8
We do not know where Theophilus lived, so we do not know to which city Acts was originally directed. There has been a great deal of discussion as to when Luke/Acts was written, and from what place it was written. Some feel that Luke had access to Mark’s gospel. It is interesting that both Mark and Luke were closely connected to Paul in Rome, during his imprisonment and his last days (Col. 4:10, 14; 2 Tim. 4:11; Phile. 1:24). It is certainly not unthinkable that it was written from Rome, and likely before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. We see nothing about this terrible event in either book. While a number of commentators choose this date and dates afterward, it seems more likely that both Luke and Acts were written before the persecution of Nero began in the summer of AD 64.9 Mark also seems to have been written around this turbulent time.
Some have called this book the Acts of the Holy Spirit. While this is not a complete title, we can know from it that the history of Acts did not end with the 28th chapter, but rather, it continues on today in the present work of the church.
CHAPTER 1
In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach. Acts 1:1
Here Luke is referring back to his gospel account which we call “The Gospel of Luke.” We remember that he addressed that account also to Theophilus. This man may have been a Christian already, or he may have been studying about Christianity (cf. Lk. 1:4). The name Theophilus can be translated in several ways. It can mean “God lover,” “friend of God,” or “loved by God.” 1
In his ministry on earth Jesus began something: He “began to do and to teach.” That was only the beginning as it was recorded in the first volume of Luke’s work. His disciples, through the power of the Holy Spirit, will now continue to do and teach just as their Master had done. Jesus did what so many teachers today fail to do. He did things and then he taught about them. The Venerable Bede (c. 672-735) says of this: “First ‘do’ and then ‘teach,’ because Jesus, establishing the pattern of a good teacher, taught nothing except those things which he did.” 2
Jesus began something, but his followers must continue what he began. Charles H. Roberson liked to tell the story about how the great Handel bowed his head after finishing the Messiah, and said, “It is finished.” Roberson says, “Only the score was finished. All would have gone for naught unless other hands and voices should take it up and sing it!” 3 So Luke tells what Jesus began, while Acts tells of what he continued to do through his disciples. The Scottish great William Barclay says, “Acts is the second volume of a story which has no end.” 4
Jesus continued to do and teach “until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen” (1:2). His ascension to heaven was a very important event and will be covered fully in verse 9. In the meantime he spent much effort in giving additional instructions to his disciples. It is clear in Luke 24:45, and in John 20:22, that Jesus ministered the Holy Spirit to his disciples prior to his ascension into heaven. He breathed on them that they might receive the Spirit and he opened the eyes of their understanding.5
“After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God” (1:3). Jesus gave many proofs over a forty day period in order to give certain assurance of his resurrection and to give further important teaching about the kingdom of God.6 The forty day period took place immediately after the resurrection and during the period known as the “Counting of the Omer” in Israel’s tradition (Lev. 23:9-16). This was always a period of anticipation as Israel awaited the grain harvest. Thus, Jesus continued appearing to his disciples for all but about ten days of the fifty days between Passover and Pentecost.
There were obviously numerous appearances and they were to believers only. These appearances were to Mary Magdalene and the other women who were at the grave (Matt. 28:9-10; Jn. 20:14-18). Then he appeared to the Emmaus disciples, (Lk. 24:15ff.); to Simon Peter, (Lk. 24:34); to ten apostles and others (Lk. 24:36; Jn. 20:19); to the eleven disciples (Jn. 20:26); to the seven apostles in Galilee (Jn. 21:4); to James and then to 500 followers at one time (1 Cor. 15:6-7); and to the assembly of disciples on the Day of Ascension (Lk. 24:50).7 Jesus’ resurrection was certainly no private matter. Years later, Paul could speak of the 500 people at one time who saw Jesus resurrected, and how most of those people were still living. So obviously, hundreds of people saw the resurrected Christ.
During the forty days Jesus continued to teach his disciples about the kingdom of God. This was the core of his teaching during his three or so years of ministry and it was a subject of vital importance. Today we are handicapped when we think on the subject of the kingdom. There are no kings in our western democracies, although some try to act like kings. Biblical people were quite used to the idea because kings had always ruled over them. When we think of kings and kingdoms today we also think of land areas and boundaries. However, in God’s kingdom there is no territory and there are no fixed boundaries. One writer has termed kingdom (Gk. basileia) as the “kingly rule” that God has over his people.8 This kingly rule encompasses earth and heaven. This rule is invisible and one must be born again to perceive this kingdom and to enter it (Jn. 3:5-6).
It is truly amazing today that in the Christian world very little is said about the kingdom of God. This is strange when we consider it was the core of Jesus’ message during his ministry and during the forty days after his resurrection. It was often mentioned in Paul’s preaching as well (cf. Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 4:20; Gal. 5:21; 2 Thess. 1:5). In the end it appears in Revelation 12:10.
“On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: ‘Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about” (1:4). This at first seems so casual, but when we reflect a little it becomes an astounding statement. Jesus apparently ate with the disciples on several occasions after his resurrection (Lk. 24:42-43; Acts 10:41). Now, most surely, Jesus in his resurrected body did not need to eat food. Yet, the resurrected body apparently still has the capacity to eat and enjoy food. After all, the resurrected and glorified members of the Lord’s great church will all dine together with Christ at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9). The sixth century Christian poet Arator said: “What proof [of his real humanity] could the Risen One give so surely as the fact of eating: Human bodies show that they live by this means.” 9
The disciples were sternly instructed not to leave Jerusalem. That is where the Spirit would be poured out shortly and they were not to miss it. Also, we must remember that Jerusalem is the redemptive hub of the whole world. The Holy Spirit would be given in Jerusalem (Lk. 24:49) and the gospel would flow from Jerusalem to the rest of the world. It is said in Psalm 50:2, “From Zion, perfect in beauty, God shines forth.” Also Isaiah 2:3 says, “…The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.”
In Modern and Postmodern Christianity we are often in a fizz to get things done for the Lord. In his business we need to learn how to wait— how to be still. It is those who wait upon the Lord who renew their strength (Isa. 40:31).10
“For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (1:5). John the Baptist bore witness to this very truth. He said, “I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matt. 3:11).
The baptism of the Holy Spirit has become a very controversial subject for the churches of our day. Some accept it while others fear it as they would a plague. Much of this confusion has probably come about by certain false teachings that arose in the Charismatic world. In opposition to the clear teaching of scripture, some prided themselves in having “the baptism” and looked down upon others who had not experienced it. This was tragic.
It is rather surprising when we search the New Testament for the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit,” that we find only seven clear references to the event. These verses are Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; Acts 11:16; and 1 Corinthians 12:13. The interesting thing about these references is that all but one speak of the same thing, of a coming, one-time, historical event. The one that does not speak of this, 1 Corinthians 12:13, seems to be looking back and commenting on this one-time event. It should be pointed out that the historical event appears to have been extended in three distinct and separate stages, to Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles.11
This information should help us see that the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” may not be the best expression to describe the Holy Spirit’s coming and work today. It leads to a lot of unnecessary confusion between the one-time historical event and the subsequent work of the Spirit. Much better terminology would probably be the “filling of the Holy Spirit” as we see in Ephesians 5:18, or the common expression “Spirit filled.” While being filled with the Spirit can describe our initial Holy Spirit experience, as in the case of Paul (Acts 9:17), it can also describe a common and continuing experience that happens to the Lord’s followers (Acts 4:8; 4:31; 13:9; & 13:52).
We know from the Bible that the Holy Spirit is an absolute necessity in the Christian life. In Romans 8:9 we read: “…And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.” Also, as we look carefully at Jesus’ answer to Nicodemus in John 3:5-7, we see that the Holy Spirit must accompany the new birth. The Christian life cannot be lived without the Holy Spirit’s presence within. God’s Spirit is necessary for our worship (Jn. 4:24), for our walk (Gal. 5:16), for the exercise of spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12:27-31), and for the production of spiritual fruit (Gal. 5:22-26). Clearly, the Holy Spirit is given to us at our conversion and from that point we can and should choose to be filled with the Spirit. There is no scriptural justification for some sort of “second blessing” after salvation.
Other commentators have remarked about this. Texas professor Bob Utley says, “I believe there is only one initial spiritual baptism into Christ in which believers identify with Jesus’ death and resurrection…” 12 Pastor and evangelist Ray Stedman says, “The Holy Spirit is given now, immediately when anyone believes in Jesus. There is no sign, no feeling, no emotional indication of it. It occurs, as Jesus said it would, when any believe on him…is this not ritual but reality; it is also not a program, but power.” 13 Web commentator David Guzik says, “It may be more useful to describe the baptism of the Holy Spirit as a condition than as an experience…” 14
The baptism of the Holy Spirit was to come quickly, actually it was less than ten days away from those early disciples. The word for baptize is the future passive of the Greek baptizo and it means to dip, immerse or sink into water.15 It is used in the Bible as a symbol of cleansing. The Christian father Cyril of Jerusalem (fourth century) compares natural with spiritual baptism saying: “The water, however, flows round the outside only, but the Spirit baptizes also the soul within, and that completely.” 16 In early Christian times the coming of the Spirit was often associated with one’s baptism, which happened immediately.
THE KINGDOM OF GOD
Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” Acts 1:6
We notice here that Jesus does not rebuke them for having the idea that the kingdom would be restored. He just tells them that their timing is off. At that moment they needed to concentrate on receiving the Holy Spirit and on becoming witnesses to the whole world. The Bible is clear that the kingdom certainly will be restored to Israel in God’s time. Every good promise made to Israel in the Old Testament will come to pass during the Millennial Age. God would not let the disciples fully know the program but he would let them fully have the power. “… Christ’s mission was not to bring the kingdom in earthly splendor but to bring it in spiritual power.” 17
“He said to them: ‘It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority” (1:7). Throughout their three years or so with the Master, the disciples had continually misunderstood the kingdom and its coming. They had always pictured it as a natural thing wherein Jesus would overcome the Romans and hand the natural kingdom back to Israel. On one occasion, we even see James and John secretly asking for positions of authority with Jesus in this natural kingdom (cf. Mk. 10:35-45; Lk. 22:24-27). It is possible that after the resurrection of Jesus their minds were somewhat clearer, but it is obvious that they were still befuddled to a degree.
“But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (1:8). This is a power verse that many Christians are prone to memorize and keep handy and that is good. Originally, Israel was to be God’s witness (Isa. 43:10). The nation was to be a light for the Gentiles (Isa. 42:6). However, Israel became a dismal failure in this respect. Now, the Servant Messiah will help Israel to at last become a light to the nations (Isa. 49:6). That witness will come through the gospel and the power of the Holy Spirit.
Barker and Kohlenberger state: “The mandate to witness stands as the theme for the whole of Acts…it is his final and conclusive word to his disciples before his ascension…the mission; and a program that begins at Jerusalem (cf. 2:42 – 8:3), moves out to ‘all Judea and Samaria’ (cf. 8:4 – 12:24), and progresses until it finally reaches the imperial capital city of Rome (12:25 – 28:31).” 18 Indeed, several commentators see this as a short and concise outline of the Book of Acts.
In this book we observe how Peter and the others did a thorough work in Jerusalem until the time that James was put to death. During that time Philip introduced the gospel to Samaria with a great revival. After about eight years, first Peter and then Paul began to take the gospel to the Gentiles.19 That story continues to this day. God’s great plan was always to include the nations as Psalm 72:8 declares: “May he rule from sea to sea and from the River to the ends of the earth.”
JESUS’ ASCENSION INTO HEAVEN
After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. Acts 1:9
In Luke’s first volume he tells us how Jesus led the disciples out to the vicinity of Bethany. There he lifted up his hands and blessed them. While in the act of blessing them he was taken up to heaven. They worshipped him and then returned with joy to Jerusalem (Lk. 24:50-52). The place of Jesus’ ascension was on the Mount of Olives just east of the Old City of Jerusalem (v. 12). “Five times in this extremely brief account it stresses that the ascension took place visibly.” 20
We can understand how Jesus could now bestow great power on his disciples. Psalm 68:18 says, “When you ascended on high, you took many captives; you received gifts from people, even from the rebellious—that you, LORD God, might dwell there” (cf. Eph. 4:8). The ascension of Christ was a glorious event but it speaks of an even more glorious event, his coming again.
The ascension let the disciples know that Jesus was physically gone from this earth. He had returned to his pre-incarnation glory in heaven. Barclay says, “…There would have been something quite wrong if the resurrection appearances had just simply petered out…” 21 The grand and glorious Incarnation of Jesus the Son of God on earth had come to an end.
We are told here that a cloud hid the Master from their eyes. Having lived in Israel many years I can attest that at the Pentecost season the weather is almost perfect and there is hardly a cloud in the sky. Yet, this cloud appeared and received the Lord Jesus. Several commentators feel that this cloud represents the shekinah glory of God.22 The disciples were not to think that Jesus was gone for good. By the fact that he had left the earth he was now able to send the Holy Spirit to be with them forever (Jn. 16:7).
“They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them” (1:10). The disciples were obviously straining hard trying to see Jesus as long as possible when suddenly two angels stood beside them. These men were clothed in dazzling garments as is often seen with angel appearances in the Bible (e.g. Matt. 28:3; Lk. 24:4; Jn. 20:12).
“‘Men of Galilee,’ they said, ‘why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven’” (1:11). The angels called the disciples “men of Galilee.”
Several times in Acts we are told of the Galilee origins of the disciples (2:7; 13:31). From what we know, all the disciples were actually from Galilee with the possible exception of Judas Iscariot, who had now passed from the scene.23
The angels asked why the disciples were staring into the sky. There was now a lot of work to be done. English pastor, lecturer and Bible commentator, John Stott, says: “the apostles committed two opposite errors…First, they were hoping for political power (the restoration of the kingdom to Israel). Secondly, they were gazing up into the sky (preoccupied with the heavenly Jesus). Both were false fantasies.” 24
Stott says further: “There was something fundamentally anomalous about their gazing up into the sky when they had been commissioned to go to the ends of the earth. It was the earth not the sky which was to be their preoccupation…Curiosity about heaven and its occupants, speculation about prophecy and its fulfilment, an obsession with ‘times and seasons’ – these are aberrations which distract us from our God-given mission.” 25 The shining angels made a great promise to the bewildered disciples. They said that just as Jesus has gone he would likewise return.
The ascension has many lessons for us. Guzik says, “He left physically and will so come in like manner… He left visibly and will so come in like manner… He left from the Mount of Olives and will so come in like manner… He left in the presence of his disciples and will so come in like manner… He left blessing his church and will so come in like manner.” 26
THE DISCIPLES OR APOSTLES OF JESUS
Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk from the city. Acts 1:12
The disciples returned from the Mount of Olives to the city of Jerusalem. This was about a Sabbath day’s walk or the distance of approximately one kilometer or three-fourths of a mile (2000 cubits). This was the distance the rabbis had determined that a person could walk on the Sabbath day without breaking the law (cf. Exod. 16:29; Num. 35: 5).27 It was quite a climb because the Mount of Olives towered over the Old City and Temple Mount by some 300 feet (90 meters).
“When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James” (1:13).
There is a long-standing tradition that the Christians were located in the upper city of Jerusalem near the newly discovered Essene Gate, or generally in the area of what is called Mount Zion today. They assembled there in the upper room (Gk. huperōion).
Such upper rooms were built on the flat roofs of large oriental houses. The room could also be a large third story where gatherings could take place or where prayer meetings could be held. This could have been the same upper room mentioned in Mark 14:15 and Luke 22:13.28 The traditional Upper Room (Cenacle) today can be seen in this same area of the city, although the structure itself is probably not original. The noted Scottish commentator F. F. Bruce says, “It is an attractive speculation that the house which contained this upper room was the house of Mary, mother of John Mark…but this is even less demonstrable.” 29
Luke gives us a listing of the disciples of the Lord. The commentator James Burton Coffman says of them: “These men, in one sense, are the most important men who ever lived…they are fully worthy of the honor God has reserved for them in the inscription of their names upon the foundations of the Eternal City (Rev. 21:14).” 30 Listings of the disciples are found in all four gospels, with the list clearly detailed in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 10:2-4; Mk. 3:13-19; Lk. 6:14-16). We note that in every listing Simon, who was renamed Peter, is always in first place and Judas is always listed last. Of course, this is not the case here in Acts since Judas was already dead. Simon also had the name of Cephas (Aram. kepha) meaning a rock (Jn. 1:42).31 This name when translated into Greek became petros, also meaning a small rock. We know from many scriptures that Peter, James and John made up the important inner-circle of Jesus’ disciples.
The disciples seem to be listed in groups of four, with Peter heading the first group, Philip heading the second group and James the Son of Alphaeus heading the third group. The first two groups of four remain stable in all the listings. It is only in the last grouping that there are some seeming differences. Thaddeus who appears in Mark’s listing does not appear in Luke’s listing or here in Acts. Instead we have Judas son of James mentioned. It is thought that the two were one and the same.32 Simon the Cananean (his name meaning “zealous”) mentioned in Mark and in Matthew shows up as Simon the Zealot here and in Luke 6:15.
There are a number of interesting things about the disciples or apostles. Simon the Cananean or Simon the Zealot was probably a former member of the Zealot group. The center for this movement, which advocated violent opposition to Rome, was at Gamla, a city just up the Golan Heights not too far from Bethsaida. Later this city was totally destroyed in the Roman war. Judas Iscariot (man of Kerioth) may have been from a city of this name in southern Judea. If so, he would have been the only one of the disciples who was not a Galilean.33 Thomas apparently had the Hebrew name of Didymus or “twin” (cf. John 11:16). In Mark’s gospel we see Matthew called by that name and also by Levi. Bartholomew here is called Nathanael in John 21:2. Judas here is called “Thaddaeus” or “Lebbeus” in other places (cf. Matt. 10:3 KJV; Lk. 6:16; Jn. 14:22).34
The listings of the apostles can be a little tricky. There were two Simons, two Jamses and two Judases, along with several variations of names. We might wonder why they were listed in groups of fours. Utley thinks this might have been the case so that the men could alternate from time to time as they checked in on their families.35
“They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers” (1:14). Donald Guthrie of London Bible College feels that in the first five chapters of Acts “we have a series of pictures of the primitive Christian community in Jerusalem.” 36 This is undoubtedly one of those pictures. It is unfortunate that the NIV leaves out the idea of “one mind,” “one heart,” or “one accord” as seen in other translations of this verse. The Greek word is homothumadon and it means being of the same mind or spirit. Eleven of the twelve appearances of this word in the New Testament are found in the Book of Acts.37 The word is obviously a favorite of Luke. This word presents a picture of the beautiful and precious unity that existed in early Christianity.
Another Greek word translated “constantly” here is proskarterountes. The idea behind this word is to be strong, steadfast, or to stick to the matter of prayer.38 Others speak of it as being intently engaged in prayer. In our modern and postmodern churches we could take some lessons from this example.
We notice that this special group included the women who were followers of Jesus, along with Mary his mother. Also included at last were the brothers of Jesus. Many of these women had probably followed Jesus from Galilee (Matt. 27:55; Lk. 8:2-3; 23:49; 24:10). They no doubt included Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Susanna and others. The Lutheran commentator Paul Kretzmann says of the mother of Jesus: “… Mary was undoubtedly regarded with great respect by the apostles, but there is no indication of the idolatrous homage which was later paid to her in various churches.” 39 Bruce notes that this is the last occasion that Jesus’ mother Mary appears in New Testament history.40
Here for the first time, the brothers of Jesus are included. Of course, these were really the half-brothers of Jesus, since he was born of the Holy Spirit. As we might remember, the brothers of Jesus did not join or support his ministry while on earth. From Mark 6:3, we know their names as James, Joseph, Judas and Simon. It may be that the Lord’s special post-resurrection appearance to James (1 Cor. 15:7) caused the other brothers to join in. James went on to become the leader of the Jerusalem church. Bruce remarks, “‘The brothers of the Lord’ continued to form a distinct group in the church well into the apostolic age (1 Cor. 9:5).” 41
Stott comments upon these intense prayer meetings: “It was a healthy combination: continuous praise in the temple, and continuous prayer in the home…” 42
MATTHIAS CHOSEN
In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) and said, “Brothers and sisters, the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.” Acts 1:15-17
After his terrible fall and later reinstatement by Jesus, we see Peter taking his rightful place of leadership. He was now a man full of the Spirit as we shall note shortly from his preaching in chapter 2. The risen Christ had breathed upon him (Jn. 20:22) and now he was filled with the wisdom and power of God. We see here that there were about 120 believers in the group. This obviously did not count the hundreds of believers in other places, such as in Galilee.
Peter addresses them regarding Judas Iscariot who betrayed the Lord and fell from his position of discipleship. The English Baptist commentator Peter Pett says of this meeting: “Luke devotes eleven verses of valuable space to describing the details of the incident, and providing the information that supported it. He would surely not have done so if he had not seen it as an important and valid decision…Nowhere is this decision ever later criticized.” 43
Barker and Kohlenberger comment on the significance of this meeting saying: “A twelvefold apostolic witness was required if early Jewish Christianity was to represent itself to the Jewish nation as the culmination of Israel’s hope and the true people of Israel’s Messiah…” 44 Without a replacement for Judas, the Twelve-fold apostleship of Jesus would have been weakened. The symbolism of the Twelve sitting on thrones and ruling with God would have been hindered (Lk. 22:29-30). Also, the picture of the Twelve becoming foundation stones for the New Jerusalem would have become marred (Rev. 21:14).
We realize here that Peter greatly valued and honored the scripture. In the following verses he will quote from the ancient word of God to substantiate his actions.
Peter continues to describe the fate of Judas saying: “(With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)” (1:18-19). At first sight this passage is very difficult to reconcile with Matthew 27:3-10. It is often considered one of the most difficult contradictions in the New Testament.45 Here we are told that Judas bought a plot, but in Matthew 27:7, it appears that the Jewish chief priests and elders bought the plot.
This difficulty can be resolved when we consider the matter of agency. Here Stott quotes Eddersheim who wrote, “by a fiction of law the money was still considered to be Judas’ and to have been applied by him in the purchase of the well-known ‘potter’s field.’” 46 Judas was so smitten with remorse that he returned the money he had received for betraying Jesus. The priests and elders could not put this money into the treasury because it was “blood money” (Matt. 27:6). Therefore in the name of Judas they bought the field.
The next problem with this passage is the manner in which Judas died. In Matthew 27:5, we are told that Judas went and hanged himself. Here in Acts we see that he fell headlong and his body burst open with his intestines spilling out. New Testament research professor, Howard Marshall suggests that Judas did indeed hang himself but after his body had begun to decompose the rope likely broke and he fell causing his body to burst open.47 In any case, it must have been a gruesome sight.
The story of the Potter’s Field as a place for burying strangers still rings true in the 21st Century. It is still difficult for strangers (non-Jewish), or particularly evangelical Christians, to find a burial place in the City of Jerusalem. There is a small historic burial ground on Mt. Zion where several famous Christians who loved Israel are buried. There is another plot on Emek Refaim Street administered by the Alliance Church, and another tiny plot in the southern outskirts of the Gilo suburbs. The two larger cemeteries are mostly full and closed to any new burials. So, the story of the Potter’s Field goes on and on.
“‘For,’ said Peter, ‘it is written in the Book of Psalms: May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,’ and, ‘May another take his place of leadership’” (1:20). Here Peter quotes freely from Psalms 69:25 and 109:8. He is using a common manner of Bible interpretation that was practiced among the ancient Jewish people. Two separate passages could be linked and expounded together if they shared a common word.48
We may wonder how the earliest Christians could be so proficient in remembering and applying key Bible verses. It was quite impossible for them to carry the ancient scrolls around or even have quick access to them. Pett has suggested that they may have been using an anthology of their favorite verses.49 We sometimes do a similar thing today with our key verses on witnessing to the lost and in other matters.
“Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection” (1:21-22). There is a fanciful teaching around today that Peter moved too quickly and that he should have waited for the apostle Paul to come along and take the place of Judas. It is obvious from this verse that Paul would have never met the requirements for the twelfth disciple.50 Paul had not been with Jesus throughout his ministry and thus he would have not qualified. The disciples of Jesus had to be eyewitnesses to all that Jesus did and all he taught throughout his ministry.
“So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias” (1:23). The First Century Jewish historian, Josephus, tells us that both these men were members of the Seventy who were previously chosen and sent out by the Lord.51 The name Barsabbas was from the Aramaic language and has the meaning “son of the Sabbath.” It could possibly indicate that he was born on the Sabbath.52 At that time, many Jewish people had acquired Latin names in addition to their Jewish ones. Here we see that Joseph was also known as Justus, meaning “Just.” Matthias was an abbreviated form of Mattithiah. This was a fairly common name in those days.53 The Hebrew roots of this name would mean “a gift of the Lord.”
“Then they prayed, ‘Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs’” (1:24-25). We know from the Bible that the Lord does not judge from outward appearances but from the heart (1 Sam. 16:7; Psa. 139:1ff.). The disciples were depending upon the Lord to make this choice and they did the right thing by praying. After all, Jesus had prayed before he chose his disciples in the first place (Lk. 6:12-13).54
Judas had the grand and glorious opportunity to be listed with the Twelve but because of his own greed and foolishness he forsook this opportunity. When Luke speaks of “where he belongs” or “his own place” as in other translations, he is using a euphemistic expression that softens the awful implications of the future that Judas had chosen for himself.55
“Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles” (1:26). Today the casting of lots sounds like a strange way for such a weighty decision to be made. However, we must remember that such a practice had much Old Testament precedent (cf. Lev. 16:8; Num. 26:55; Josh. 18:6; 1 Chron. 25:8; Prov. 16:33). Guthrie says, “The lot was a sacred institution in ancient Israel and was a well-established means for ascertaining the divine will…being in fact the principle of decision by Urim and Thummim...” 56 It was in this quaint fashion that the group of Twelve was completed and the name of Matthias added. The practice of casting lots was not continued in the New Testament record.
Pett comments: “Along with the eleven he was beaten, and charged not to speak in the name of Jesus and let go, and subsequently rejoiced that he was counted worthy to suffer for the Name, and continued preaching and teaching (Acts 5:40-42)…It is apparent then that Matthias was kept very busy and played his full part in the Apostolic ministry, even though we lose touch with him after chapter 15, as we do with most of the apostles.” 57