New Testament TextActs of the Apostles (NT9302A)______________________________________________________Dr. Daniel Fletcher_______________________________________________________Peters Speech in Acts 2:14-21

July 31, 2015JN7386

Contents1. Outline of Acts 2 . v1. Outline of Acts v-viii1. Abbreviations .. ix-x1. Body 1-28

A. Introduction 1-2B. Logical Flow of Peters Sermon . 2-3C. This is That (2:14-21) . 3-10D. The Apostolic Preaching (2:22-36) 11-20E. Call to Repentance (2:37-42) .. 20-28

1. Conclusion ... 28-291. Bibliography 30-311. Appendix: Codex Bezae .. 32-37

Outline of Acts 2

1. The Descent of the Spirit (2:1-4)1. The Crowds Amazement (2:5-13)1. This Is That (2:14-21)1. The Apostolic Preaching (2:22-36)1. The Call To Repentance (2:37-42)1. The First Christian Church (2:43-47)[footnoteRef:1] [1: F.F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, The English Text With Introduction, Exposition And Notes (The New International Commentary On The New Testament/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 53-81. ]

Outline of ActsI. The Beginning of the Church (1:1-2:47) A. Prologue (1:1-3) B. The Ascension of Jesus (1:6-11) C. The Return of the Disciples to Jerusalem (1:12-14) D. The Twelfth Disciple (1:15-26) E. The Pouring Out of the Spirit (2:1-13) F. Peter Preaches the Gospel (2:14-42) G. A Summary of the Life of the Early Church (2:43-47)

II. The Church and the Jewish Authorities (3:1-5:42) A. The Healing of a Lame Man (3:1-10) B. Peter Explains the Incident (3:11-26) C. The Arrest of Peter and John (4:1-22) D. The Disciples Pray for Further Boldness (4:23-31) E. A Further Summary of the Life of the Early Church (4:32-37) F. The Sin of Ananias and Sapharia (5:1-11) G. The Coming Growth of the Church (5:12-16) H. The Second Arrest of the Apostles (5:17-42)III. The Church Begins to Expand (6:1-9:31) A. The Appointment of the Seven (6:1-7) B. The Controversy Over Stephen (6:8-15) C. Stephens Speech in Court (7:1-53) D. The Death of Stephen (7:54-8:1a) E. The Sequel to Stephens Death (8:1b-3) F. The Gospel Spreads to Samaria (8:4-25) G. The Conversion of an Ethiopian (8:26-40) H. The Conversion and Call of Paul (9:1-19a) I. Paul Begins to Preach (9:19b-11:18)

IV. The Beginning of the Gentile Mission (9:32-12:25) A. Peters Mighty Works (9:32-43) B. The Conversion of Cornelius (10:1-11:18) C. The Church at Antioch (11:19-30) D. The Imprisonment and Escape of Peter (12:1-25)

V. The Mission of Asia Minor and its Aftermath (13:1-14:24) A. The Call to Mission (13:1-3) B. Evangelism in Cyprus (13:4-12) C. Evangelism in the Synagogue at Pisidian Antioch (13:13-52) D. Conflict at Iconium (14:1-7) E. Evangelism of the Heathen at Lystra (14:8-20) F. The Return Journey at Antioch (14:21-28) G. The Assembly at Jerusalem (15:1-35)

VI. Pauls Missionary Campaign in Macedonia and Achaia (15:26-18:17) A. Paul, Barnabas, Mark, and Silas (15:26-41) B. Pauls Return to Derbe and Lystra (16:1-5) C. The Call to Macedonia (16:6-10) D. Philippi: the First Macedonian Church (16:11-40) E. Thessalonica and Beroea (17:1-15) F. Athens: the Areopagus Address (17:16-34) G. Corinth (18:1-17)

VII. Pauls Missionary Campaign in Asia (18:18-20:38) A. Pauls Departure from Corinth (18:18-21) B. Pauls Journey to Caesarea and Antioch (18:22-23) C. The Arrival of Apollos (18:24-28) D. The Twelve Disciples at Ephesus (19:1-7) E. Pauls Work at Ephesus (19:8-22) F. The Reaction of Paganism at Ephesus (19:23-41) G. Pauls Journey from Ephesus to Miletus (20:1-16) H. Pauls Farewell Address to Miletus (20:17-38)

VIII. Pauls Arrest and Imprisonment (21:1-28:31) A. Pauls Journey to Jerusalem (21:1-16) B. Pauls Arrest in Jerusalem (21:17-36) C. Pauls Defense Before the Crowd (21:37-22:29) D. Paul Appears Before the Sanhedrin (22:30-23:10) E. Paul is Transferred to Caesarea (23:11-34) F. Paul Appears Before Felix (24:1-27) G. Paul Appears Before Festus (25:1-12) H. Paul Appears Before Festus and Agrippa (25:13-26:32) I. The Journey to Italy (27:1-28:16) J. Paul and the Jews in Rome (28:17-31)[footnoteRef:2] [2: I. Howard Marshall, Acts (The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980, Repr. 2002), 51-54. ]

Abbreviations[footnoteRef:3] [3: Don L. Meredith, Supplement To Turabian 8th Edition (Memphis: Harding School of Theology, 2013), 15. http://hst.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Turabian-400-BW.pdf. Accessed July 22, 2015. ]

Abbreviations[footnoteRef:4] [4: Ibid. ]

B-A-G-DBauers Greek-English LexiconMTMasoretic TextLXXSeptuagintOTOld TestamentNTNew TestamentDSSDead Sea ScrollsBHSBiblia Hebraica Stuttgaartensia

IntroductionThe study of Acts in this seminar brought to this students attention the importance of understanding Acts from the standpoint of the great speeches or sermons by the early preachers. Often congregational Bible classes over the years focus solely on the conversions or baptisms in Lukes account of the early church. While this is an important aspect of Acts, one cannot overlook the sermons or speeches that lead individuals to Christ. The first of the great public sermons takes place in chapter two on the feast day of Pentecost (2:1). Scholars tend to minimize the importance of these sermons because they view them as literary inventions of Luke, rather than a record of a historical message. Luke is familiar with the authors of these speeches and is present during several of Pauls speeches (note the so called we-sections). Even though he may not have heard the others, he was in close contact with Peter, Mark, Philip, and others who had personally experienced the earlier years of the church at Jerusalem. Does Peter quote these men (like Peter) verbatim or does he simply preserve their content?[footnoteRef:5] Let us consider the reliability of these sermons. [5: Jerry Horner, The Credibility And The Eschatology Of Peters Speech At Pentecost, in Pneuma: The Journal Of The Society For Pentecostal Studies (Spring 1980): 25. ]

The text states that the outpouring of the Spirit upon the apostles (in my humble opinion) took place at the third hour or nine a.m. (2:15). The text states that what is recorded by Luke is not the whole sermon that Peter proclaimed. Luke says in vs. 40, and with many other words he witnessed (), letting the reader know Peter says much more than the author recounts. While the fact that Luke did not record the whole sermon but merely summarizes the high points, this should not cause conservatives problems on the historicalness of the message. This is far from the conclusion of Thucydides that speeches were invented in order to give new life to vague figures out of the dim past. Conservatives can confidently say that Lukes record of these messages contains the substance of the first recorded sermon in the Christian church.[footnoteRef:6] [6: Ibid., 26. The comparison between Lukes recording of these sermons is similar to the recording of Jesus preaching and teaching by the four Gospels. The Gospel writers give us the substance of Jesus teaching/preaching and at times use their own style/language to support the theology of their individual Gospel. ]

Logical Flow of Peters SermonPeters sermon can be broken down into the following logical flow. This would allow the audience to easily remember the contents of the speech as well as allow a stenographer (if one argues that one did in fact exist) to take notes or record the high points in shorthand. First, the apostle Peter shoots down the argument that the apostles were drunk and explains that the Spirit fell upon them in accordance with Old Testament prophecy (2:14-21; Joel 2). Second, the Christology of the Christ is argued in vv. 22-36 by focusing upon Jesus earthly works. He points out His resurrection (quoting from Ps 16) and finally the exaltation of Christ (vv. 33-35). The third and final section of Peters sermon is the response of the crowd and Peters call to repentance (see vv. 37-39).[footnoteRef:7] [7: Gregory V. Trull, Peters Interpretation Of Psalm 16:8-11 In Acts 2:25-32, Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (October-December 2004): 433. ]

Peters speech shows signs of unity. He begins by quoting from Joel chapter two in reference to the coming of the Holy Spirit and then shows how the exalted Lord of Ps. 110 brought the Holy Spirit (vv. 33-35).[footnoteRef:8] The Lord whom the prophet Joel mentions in chapter 2 is the same risen and exalted Lord of Ps. 16 and 100, and the source of salvation (Acts 2:36-38). Peters quotation of Joel in Acts 2:21 and his subsequent allusion to it in verses 38-39 unify Peters message.[footnoteRef:9] [8: Ibid., 433-43. ] [9: Ibid., 434. ]

This is That (2:14-21)Peter turns to prophecy to proclaim that the days of fulfillment are finally here. There is a connection here with Peters statement over in 1 Pet. 1:10ff., where he writes that the old prophets foretold not only the coming of the Messiah but also diligently searched for Him and searched for the time when this would be. Now that the Christ has been revealed at the last times (1 Pet. 1:20), they do not need to search any further nor inquire about the coming Messiah.[footnoteRef:10] Peter uses the rabbinical hermeneutic approach of comparison, sometimes referred to as this is that. [10: Bruce, 67. ]

The sermon of Peter starts off with a scriptural passage from the OT that adequately explains the unusual behavior of the believers, but his speech also gives the apostle the ability to develop the theme of Jesus Christ thanks to his connecting the Spirits outpouring with the theme of salvation for those who call on the name of the Lord. This first speech in Acts 2 offers an explanation on who is the Lord.[footnoteRef:11] [11: I. Howard Marshall, Acts, in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, Eds. G.K. Beale and D.A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/Nottingham, England: Apollos, 2007), 532. ]

Verse 14. Luke states in the opening of verse fourteen, But Peter having stood up with the eleven, (from ), which is an aorist passive participle (from , to stand). While all twelve were speaking at the same time, Peter comes to the forefront as the main spokesman from the other eleven. Robertson states that the author of the third Gospel and Acts is fond of this pictorial use of the participle staqei/j as no other NT writer (see Luke 18:11, 40; 19:8; Acts 5:20; 17:22; 27:21). Luke tells us that he lifted up his voice (e)ph=ren th\n fwnh\n au)tou=). The verb e)ph=ren is a 1st Aorist Active Indicative, 3rd Person Singular, from the verb e)pai/rw (to lift or hold up). Robertson says that the phrase lifted his voice is found only four times in the NT (see Luke 11:29; Acts 2:14; 14:11; 22:22).[footnoteRef:12] Peter spoke out or declared (a)pefqe/gzato) from the verb , a 1st Aorist Middle Indicative, 3rd Person Singular. Peter addresses all those who dwell in Jerusalem (, from katoike/w, Present Active Participle). Why would Peter address those who are living in Jerusalem when they are from all over the world? Could this be because many are remaining here over the last fifty days since the feast of Passover/Unleavened Bread, or is this symbolic that every Jew considers Jerusalem to be there home? Peter begins his speech with two imperatives: (1) let this be known (tou=to u(mi=n gnwsto\n e)/stw), the Present Active Imperative from the verb ei)mi\ and (2) give ear/pay attention (e)nwti/sasqe, from the verb e)nwti/zomai, to give ear, pay attention to, an Aorist Imperative) to my words. Luke here connects the Present and Aorist Imperative. [12: A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament, Vol III, The Acts Of The Apostles (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930), 25. ]

Verse 15. Peter replies to the accusation here in verse 15 that the apostle are drunk (vs. 13 - then verse 14 begins Peters great speech). For these are not drunk (ou) ga\r ... ou(=toi mequ/ousin mequ/w, to be drunk, Present Active Indicative, 3rd Person Plural), as you you suppose (w(j u(mei\j u(polamba/nete u(polamba/nw, to take up, support, reply, suppose; Present Active Indicative 2nd Person Plural). The use of u(mei\j here is for the purpose of emphasis, as several of the good commentaries and grammarians point out. The point of emphasis is, as you yourselves suppose. The reason why they are not intoxicated: for it is the third hour of the day (th=j h(me/raj, a genitive of time). This would be 9 am in Jewish time, too early in the morning for hitting the bottle.Verse 16. Now we come to the part of Peters speech where he makes the comparison (this is that). A)lla\ tou=to/ e)stin to\ ei)rhme/non dia\ tou= profh/tou )Iwh/l (But this is that which has been spoken through the prophet Joel). The this is that formula is compared by some to the interpretive formula found in the DSS, Its interpretation refers to This hermeneutical technique is known as a pesher (Hebrew term for interpretation).[footnoteRef:13] The phrase, has been spoken (to\ ei)rhme/non), is a Perfect Passive Participle from the verb, le/gw. The passage under consideration comes from Joel 2:28-32 (MT, 3:1-5). Peters sermon here (and Luke throughout the book of Acts) quotes from the LXX, which does read different than the Hebrew text. The following chart shows the main differences between the Greek and the Hebrew text of Joel. [13: Marshall, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 521, 33. ]

Acts 2:17 (Peters Sermon)Joel 2:28 (LXX)[footnoteRef:14] [14: The quote from Joel 2:28-32 in the LXX is preserved in two forms, the more older and accurate Vaticanus and D or Bezae. Vaticanus agrees almost exactly with the text of the Septuagint, but Bezae embodies a series of changes from the Septuagint, most of which make the quotation more suitable for the occasion. Metzger notes that the adaptation may be the work of the original author, and the agreement of the B-text with the Septuagint may have been produced by an editor. There is the possibility that the author copied exactly, or nearly so, from the Septuagint, and that the modifications were introduced by the Western reviser. This later view is supported by the fact that in other formal quotations the author of Acts displays a remarkable degree of faithfulness to the text of the Septuagint. The Western text is known for placing Gentiles in a more positive light and the Jews in a negative one. Some have referred to the Western editors as anti-Jewish. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, A Companion Volume to the United Bible Socities Greek New Testament (third edition) (London/NY: UBS, 1971), 295.]

Joel 3:1 (MT)

in the last daysLXX-no in the last daysMT-no in the last days

e)kxew= a)po\ tou= pneu/matojmou e)pi\ pa=san sa/rka, o

a)po/ + gen. here is partative, I will pour out My Spirit on all fleshSame in LXXSame in MT

Kai\ profhteu/sousin Oi( ui(oi\ u(mw=n kai\ ai( qugate/rej u(mw=n

Your sons and your daughters will prophesy.Same in LXXSame in MT

Kai\ oi( neani/skoi u(mw=n o(ra/seij o)/yontai,

And your young men will see visions (reverse order)Here, And your elders/older men will be dreaming dreams.Here, Qal Future, Your elders/older men will dream dreams.

Kai\ oi( presbu/teroi u(mw=n e)nupni/oij e)nupniasqh/sontai

Fut. Pass. Indic., And your older men will be dreaming dreams.Order reversed in the LXX, And your young men will see visionsOrder reversed in the MT, And your young men will see visions.

Acts 2:18Joel 2:29 (LXX)Joel 3:2 (MT)

Kai\ ge e)pi\ tou\j dou/louj mou kai\ e)pi\ ta\j dou/laj mou e)n tai=j h(me/raij e)kei/naij

Peter says My servants, the LXX and MT do notAnd upon the male servants and upon the female servants in those days.And also upon the male servants and upon the maid servants in those days

e)kxew= a)po\ tou= pneu/matoj mou, kai\ profhteu/sousin

And I will pour out My Spirit, and they will prophesy.Joel here doesnt read and they will prophesy.Joel here in MT doesnt read and they will prophesy.

Acts 2:19Joel 2:30 (LXX)Joel 3:3 (MT)

Kai\ dw/sw te/rata e)n t%= ou)ran%= a)/nw kai\ shmei=a e)pi\ th=j gh=j ka/tw, ai(=ma kai\ pu=r kai\ a)tmi/da kapnou=

And I will give wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and vapor of smoke.And I will give wonders in the heaven and on the earth, blood and fire and vapor of smoke.And I will give signs/wonders in the heavens and in the earth blood and fire and columns of smoke.

Acts 2:20 O( h(/lioj metastrafh/setai ei)j sko/toj kai\ h( selh/nh ei)j ai(=ma pri\n [] e)lqei=n h(me/ran kuri/ou th\n mega/lhn kai\ e)pifanh=The sun will be changed into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes.

Acts 2:21Kai\ e)/stai pa=j o(\j e)a\n e)pikale/stai to\ o)/noma kuri/ou swqh/setaiPeter does not quote the end of Joel 2:32 (3:5 MT).

Joel 2:31 (LXX)

Same

Joel 2:32 (LXX) Joel 3:4 (MT)

The sun will be changed/turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the great and being feared day of the LORD comes.

Joel 3:5 (MT)

And it will be all who will call on the name of the LORD will be safe, because in mount Zion and in Jerusalem will be deliverance/safety, as the LORD said, and in the survivors whom the LORD calls.[footnoteRef:15] [15: Chart prepared by the author are based on comparison of the MT with the LXX [based on the LXX = Septuaginta, ed. A. Rahlfs (Stuttgart: Wrttembergische Bibelanstalt, 1935; repr. in 9th ed., 1971)]. http://unbound.biola.edu. Accessed July 1, 2015. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 4th rev. ed. Ed. By Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph (Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblestiftung, 1990), 1357. The Greek New Testament, 3rd Ed. Ed. By Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren (Stuttgart: United Bible Socities, 1983), 421-22. Any similarity with other charts is merely coincidental. The texts are from the Unbound Bible, Biola University, 2005-06. While Lukes quoting of Peters sermonic quotes from the OT is very close to the LXX, yet there are several changes. While some might argue the differences are due to different recensions of the Greek OT, or perhaps stylistic differences, they dissimilarities are probably due to theological purposes. Marshall, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 534.]

Verses 17-21. Peter states in verse 17, And it will be in the last days, says God One notices when analyzing Peters speech and comparing his quotation with that of the Greek and Hebrew text from Joel that Luke (or Peter) adds in the last days. In the context of Joels prophecy, the prophet calls upon the people of God to true repentance after they have been subjected to an invasion of locusts, a harbinger of worse things to come on the day of the Lord. In spite of the punishment, the Lord also promises to restore the land to her former glory days of prosperity. Then Joel prophesies that the Spirit would be outpoured as part of the events preceding the coming of the day of judgment. The Spirits outpouring is only part of the prediction, for there would be wonder and signs in the heavens and on earth.[footnoteRef:16] Both the Greek and Hebrew text only contain after these things. Perhaps this phrase is based upon a reading we do not possess or Luke may be saying that the day of the Lord (Isa. 2:2l; Mic. 4:1) has finally arrived.[footnoteRef:17] I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh (e)kxew= a)po\ tou= pneu/mato\j mou e)pi\ pa=san sa/rka). The verb, pour out, comes from e)kxe/w and is a Future Active Indicative (the present and future look alike). The preposition, a)po,/ is used here either because of the variety in the manifestations of the Spirit (I Cor. 12) or because the Spirit in his entirety remains with God.[footnoteRef:18] The phrase, a)po\ tou= pneu/mato\j, is a partitive or wholative genitive, meaning that which is part of.[footnoteRef:19] While the idea of partitive is contained in the LXX and Peters quotation from Joel, Robertson states that the MT does not contain the idea of the partitive.[footnoteRef:20] [16: Marshall, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 533. ] [17: Robertson, 26. ] [18: Ibid. ] [19: Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics Of New Testament Syntax, An Intermediate Greek Grammar: The Abridgment of Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 48. ] [20: Robertson, 26. ]

The Spirit of God will be poured out upon all flesh. The idea of Gods Spirit being given in the OT is normally for a select group of people (like priests, prophets, and kings), but here the promise is for all (Luke may have Gentiles in mind here as well). In vv. 17-18, the prophet Joel lists three classes of people or parallelisms who will be recipients of this outpouring of the Spirit. They are: Sons/daughters, young/old men, and male/female servants. Bock notes that the number of female prophets in both the OT and the NT points to the fact that the coming Spirit will cross gender and social classes.[footnoteRef:21] In vs. 18, Peter adds two terms or phrases, my servants and they will prophesy, which neither the LXX nor the MT contains. [21: Darrell L. Bock, Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 113-14. ]

In vv. 19-20, the speech turns to the te/rata (from te/raj - wonders, portents, Nominative Neutral Plural) in the heavens and the shmei=a (shmei=on - signs, Nominative Neutral Plural) in the earth below, the fire and vapor of smoke, the sun turning to darkness and the moon turning to blood. The verb for turn (metastrafh/setai, is a Second Future Active Indicative) is from metastre/fw and is found only three times in the entire NT (here in Acts 2; Jas. 4:9; Gal. 1:7). Brooks and Winbery classify this as a predictive future, the most simple and basic future usage that affirms an event will occur.[footnoteRef:22] Interestingly, the reference to signs is not found in either the Greek or Hebrew text of Joel. This depiction is similar to apocalyptic imagery from Isa. 34, Matt. 24, Luke 21:25, and the book of Rev.[footnoteRef:23] While these events look back to the cross, they are fulfilled here on the day of Pentecost. These events may have some connection to the signs given through Moses to Pharaoh and the wonders displayed at Mt. Sinai, yet perhaps the reference has more relevance to the events just seven weeks prior when the Lord was crucified, buried, and rose from the tomb. Bruce suggests that during the crucifixion afternoon the paschal full moon may well have appeared blood-red in the sky in consequence of the preternatural gloom. Marshall points out that some see this as pointing to a date of Jesus crucifixion in A.D. 33. Yet many opt for the year of Jesus crucifixion as taking place in A.D. 30 and that the portents are more plausibly understood as direct precursors of the day of judgment.[footnoteRef:24] These truly were signs in the OT sense to represent something notable was taking place, Gods day of judgment had come.[footnoteRef:25] These signs would take place before the great and splendid day of the Lord comes (pri\n e)lqei=n h(me/ran kuri/ou th\n mega/lhn kai\ e)pifanh=). Here the use of the infinitive with pri/n or pri\n h)/ expresses antecedent time.[footnoteRef:26] The infinitive also occurs with the accusative of general reference. [22: James A. Brooks and Carlton L. Winbery, Syntax Of New Testament Greek (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc., 1979, 95. ] [23: Robertson, 27-28. ] [24: Marshall, Commentary on the New Testament of the Old Testament, 535. ] [25: Bruce, 69.] [26: H.E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto, Ontario: The Macmillian Company, 1927, 1955), 214. ]

The Joel prophecy ends here in vs. 21 where Luke records that all who shall call the name of the Lord shall be saved. The verb e)pikale/w means to call or to name (middle, to call upon or appeal) and is a First Aorist Middle Subjunctive. Robertson terms this an Indefinite relative clause, or as Wallace describes as being the equivalent of a 3rd or 5th class condition. Wallace explains that a subjunctive often appears after either o(\stij (a)/n/e)a/n) or o(/j a)/n. This particular type of clause usually indicates a generic or an uncertain subject and thus the particle of contingency and the need for the subjunctive. The contingency is not one of time but one of person.[footnoteRef:27] The phrase shall be saved (swqh/setai) is a Future Active Indicative (the sign of the future active is the qhj).[footnoteRef:28] The one who calls on the name of the Lord is responding to the gospel, as Luke point out later on in Acts 22:16 when Paul rehearses his conversion (be baptized, washing away sins, calling on the Lords name). This is perhaps echoed over in the context of Rom. 10:9-17 as a whole (confession, belief, calling, preaching the gospel). This verse from Romans is a strong case against those who do not see any connection between Luke-Acts and Pauls writings [27: Wallace, 208. ] [28: Fritz Rienecker, A Linguistic Key To The Greek New Testament, Ed Cleon L. Roger, Jr. (Regency Reference Library/Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976, 1980), 21. ]

The Apostolic Preaching (2:22-36)In this section (vv. 25-28) Peter quotes from the MT Ps. 16 (Ps. 15 LXX) and attributes authorship to David. This psalm is a prayer or cry for help from God (16:1) that is based upon Davids relationship with God and is an affirmation of his commitment to God (16:2-6). This psalm becomes a statement of praise to God and confidence in him (16:7-11), and it is this latter section that is cited here.[footnoteRef:29] In fact, Trull refers to this as the apostles commentary or pesher on the sixteenth Psalm.[footnoteRef:30] The Scripture that is quoted here is not simply pulled out of the air, but builds upon one another (Joel 2 and the response to the apostles being drunk, Psalm 16 and David prophesying that the Messiah would be raised up). [29: Marshall, Commentary of the NT Use of the OT, 537. ] [30: Trull, 439. ]

Verses 22-24. Peter begins by addressing the audience this time as Men, Israelites, or )/Andrej )Israhli=tai (both Nominative Masculine Singular). This would be the subject of this clause. He states, hear these words. The imperative hear comes from a)kou/w and is a First Aorist Active Imperative, 2nd Person Plural. Robertson says that the force of the Aorist here is Do it now. He refers to Jesus as Jesus the Nazarene, probably a reference to Jesus hometown of Nazareth.[footnoteRef:31] Why emphasize where he grew up? This may take the reader/audience back to Luke 4 where Jesus was first rejected by his hometown crowd when he declared in the synagogue that he is the fulfillment of Isa. 61. [31: Bruce, 69-70. ]

The author Luke points out that Jesus is a man approved or appointed by God (a)podedeigme/non, a Perfect Passive Participle). The force of the perfect is past action with abiding results. This use of the genitive (with a)po/) would meet the criteria of Wallace as a Genitive of Agency (the personal agent by whom the action in view is accomplished) and best rendered as by (by God rather than from God).[footnoteRef:32] The way in which Jesus is proved by God is through the miracles he performed (power, signs, and wonders). [32: Wallace, 61. ]

According to vs. 23, these events took place, delivered by the determined counsel (t$= w(risme/n$ boul$=) and foreknowledge of God (kai\ prognw/sei tou= qeou=). The participle determined (w(ri/zw to appoint, determine, set, designate) is a Perfect Passive Participle, showing Gods role or actions in the past with present result. God foreknew of this from the beginning. The apostle Paul stresses Gods plan for the cross from before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1). Yet this does not absolve others from taking part in the crucifixion of Jesus, for Luke here lays the blame on the (the people, Acts 2:36; the Jewish leadership, and Pilate, see Acts 4:27).[footnoteRef:33] He says, having crucified (prosh/cantej) by the hand of lawless you (pl.) took up (anei/late a)naire/w, Aorist Active Indicative, to take away, kill; Middle to take up). Haenechen says this is where human free will and Divine resolve join hands.[footnoteRef:34] [33: Bock, 121. ] [34: Reneicker, 266. ]

According to vs. 24, Peter states that God raised up (a)ne/sthsen, a First Aorist Active Indicative, from a)ni/sthmi, to raise up) Jesus. Robertson says this is the first public proclamation of Jesus resurrection to other people than the believers.[footnoteRef:35] The second part of this statement is, having loosed the birth-pangs of death. Luke uses this term of God raising Him up in here in vs. 24, in 2:32; 3:26; 10:41; 13:32-32; 17:31). Luke also uses the verb e)gei/rw for the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 37). The phrase, having loosed the birth pains of death, the verb for loosed has OT connections with 2 Sam. 22:6 and Ps. 18:5 (LXX 17:6) and also Ps. 116:3 (LXX 114:3), a reference in this passage to ropes or snares of Sheol and loose pangs found in Job 39:3. There could be a play on words with the Heberew term (pangs) and (chords) that may help explain why the Greek renders Ps. 18:5 and 2 Sam. 22:6.[footnoteRef:36] Peter argues, because (kaqo/ti) it was (h)=n, Imperfect Active Indicative of ei)mi/) simply not able/possible (ou)k dunato\n) that death should be holden by him (u(p au)tou=) or perhaps over him (this could be classified as a Genitive of Subordination, in that death could not wield the power over him.[footnoteRef:37] Here we have the Present Passive Infinitive (kratei=sqai, from krate/w, to hold fast) with an accusative of general reference and the subject of h)=n dunato\n.[footnoteRef:38] [35: Robertson, 29. ] [36: Bock, 121-27] [37: Wallace, 54-55. ] [38: Robertson, 30. ]

Verses 25-28. Peter quotes the LXX in verse 25, I saw the Lord, while the MT reads, I have set the Lord.[footnoteRef:39] He also says in the same verse that David spoke ei)j au)to\n, not just to him, but perhaps the idea of with respect to or in reference to him.[footnoteRef:40] Dana and Mantey explain that the root meaning for the preposition ei)j is within or in and derives from the preposition e)n. Eventually the usage of ei)j would replace e)n so that in Modern Greek e)n does not occur. Out of some 1700 occurrences of ei)j in the NT, this preposition only occurs in the accusative case. While the meanings into, unto, to, for, are very common, some more remote meanings are with respect to or with reference to as here in Acts 2:25.[footnoteRef:41] The next prophecy that Peter turns to is Ps. 16:8-11 (the MT, LXX Ps. 15:8-11) here in vv. 25-28. Bock refers to this psalm as a psalm of confidence. This psalm of confidence leads to gladness and joy (vs. 26).[footnoteRef:42] [39: Marshall, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 537. ] [40: Wallace, 91. BAGD, 230. ] [41: Dana and Mantey, 103. ] [42: Bock, 121-27. ]

Acts 2:25-28Ps. 16:8-11 (LXX)Ps. 16:8-11 (MT)

Daui\d ga\r le/gei ei)j au)to/n: Proorw/mhn to\n ku/rion e)nw/pio/n mou dia\ panto/j, o(/ti e)k deciw=n mou/ e)stin i(/na mh\ saleuqw=.

Dia\ tou=to hu)fra/nqh h( kardi/a mou kai\ h)gallia/ssato h( glw=ssa/ mou, e)/ti de\ kai\ h( sa/rc mou kataskhnw/sei e)p e)lpi/di: '

O(/ti ou)k e)gkatalei/yeij th\n yuxh/n mou ei)j #(/dhn, ou/de\ dw/seij to\n o(/sio/n sou i)dei=n diafqora/n.

To see corruptionTo see corruptionTo see the pit

e)gnw/risa/j moi o(dou\j zwh=j, plhrw/seij me eu)frosu/nhj meta\ tou= prosw/pou sou.

Way of lifeWay of lifePath of life[footnoteRef:43] [43: The Greek NT, 422; BHS, 1446; Septuaginta, Rahlfs, http://unbound.biola.edu. ]

There are three differences between the LXX of Ps. 16 and the MT. (1) First, one finds that in verse 9 that (in hope) translates . Some argue that this opens the door for a resurrection understanding in verse 10. Gert Jacobus Steyn, who agrees with Schmitt and Boer, claims that in this passage the Septuagint translators imposed their own belief in the resurrection. Steyn further argues that by changing the emphasis from security () to hope (e)p e)lpi/di) permits the translation of corruption in verse 10. Darrell Bock, however, sees this change as not decisive for a new understanding of the text. The broader context of the psalm determines whether this translation points to preservation or resurrection.[footnoteRef:44]Syntactically, in hope would be classified as either a dative of place or a locative of sphere.[footnoteRef:45] [44: Trull, 434. ] [45: Brooks and Winbery, 40-41. ]

(2) Secondly, perhaps the biggest debate between the LXX and MT here in Ps. 16 is the rendering of (or corruption) for the Hebrew term (or pit) in vs. 10. Steyn argues that this rendering by the Greek translation makes possible a bodily resurrection that was not found in the Hebrew text. Yet Steyn notes that the translators of the LXX consistently renders both the noun and the verb with the idea of diafqora/. Steyn sees this as a conscious or an unconscious change by the Greek OT by a rendering that is not called for in the Hebrew.[footnoteRef:46] Bock argues that what is going on here is a word-play on the part of the LXX translators and that this change would occur conceptually, not linguistically.[footnoteRef:47] This rendering from the MT comes from the Hebrew context and not from the Septuagint translators theology. Trull does not see a problem with find corruption in the Hebrew term thus he argues that diafqora/n represents an accurate representation of the Hebrew meaning.[footnoteRef:48] [46: Trull, 434. ] [47: Ibid., 434-45. ] [48: Ibid. ]

(3) The third difference between the Greek and Hebrew of Ps. 16 is with o(dou\j zwh=j (or ways of life) verses or path of life (vs. 11). The difference in these two phrases should not be regarded as decisive. Steyn points out that the MT stresses a life to which God responds, while the LXX carries the idea of life eternal. Bock does not believe that the Greek rendering does any injustice to the MT. The rendering of the phrase really depends upon how a person looks at the entirety of the Psalms context and its conceptual frame of references.[footnoteRef:49] [49: Ibid. ]

Trull points out that the three differences are not big differences between the LXX and the MT. The first and third translations vary from the Hebrew text only if the psalm does not speak of the resurrection. The decisive rendering concerns the use of diafqora/n for . As demonstrated earlier, corruption is the proper sense of and therefore diafqora/n is a correct rendering.[footnoteRef:50] Peters understanding of Ps. 16:8-11 is found in his introduction to this passage in Acts 2:24-25. Peter argues here that: (1) God raised Jesus up from the grave; (2) death could not possibly hold Jesus; and (3) that David referred to the Messiah in this psalm.[footnoteRef:51] [50: Ibid., 435.] [51: Ibid. ]

Trull calls this the Apostle Peters Commentary on Ps. 16:8-11. After Peter quotes from Ps. 16:8-11 (in Acts 2:25-28), Peter gives 5 reasons why David was not referring to himself in this Psalm. First, he notes that King David is still in his tomb and thus David could not have been referring to his own physical resurrection.[footnoteRef:52] Trull notes, The presence of Davids remains in his tomb demonstrated that David did not speak of his own resurrection. If David had spoken of a resurrection of all the righteous, the force of Peters argument would have been blunted. While the statement is true that David would be raised, yet Ps. 16:10 describe a resurrection before decay, a specific rather than a general resurrection.[footnoteRef:53] My soul will not be abandoned in hades (ei)j #(\dhn with the usage of ei)j here to mean in).[footnoteRef:54] The decay of Davids corpse proves that he did not speak of himself; his experience did not fulfill the words of Ps. 16:10, according to the apostle Peter. In contrast to Davids grave Jesus tomb stood empty. His undecayed body had been raised to life by God the Father.[footnoteRef:55] [52: Ibid., 439. ] [53: Ibid., 440. ] [54: Dana and Mantey, 103. ] [55: Trull, 440. ]

Secondly, we note that David is able to speak of the future Messiah because David was a prophet. Third, David could also speak of a coming Messiah since the covenant of David involved a messianic hope. Fourth, David had prophetic insight into the future appearance of the Messiah. Finally, Peter argues that the psalmist David is speaking here in Psalm 16 about the resurrection of the Messiah, specifically in Ps. 16:10b.[footnoteRef:56] [56: Ibid., 439. ]

Verses 29-36. Beginning with vs. 29, Peter again addresses the crowd as Men, brethren. He continues by saying, it is lawful to speak with boldness to you concerning the patriarch David (e)co\n ei)pei=n meta\ parrhsi/aj pro\j u(ma=j peri\ tou= patria/rxou Daui\d). This is not an easy phrase to render into English. Robertson suggests supplying e)sti/n before the participle e)co\n (from the verb e)/cestin, 2nd Aorist Active Participle, it is lawful, possible, or proper).[footnoteRef:57] He speaks to them with boldness (parrhsi/aj). The old KJV and ASV render the term as freely. The apostle argues here that the occupied tomb of King David is evidence that Davids prophecy refers to the coming Messiah, and not to the son of Jesse. David expired (e)teleu/thsen, 2nd Aorist) and was buried (e)ta/fh, from qa/ptw), as opposed to Jesus tomb which was empty. David here is referred to as the patriarch (peri\ tou= patria/rxou), a genitive of relationship. The NT normally refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as patriarchs, but David is the head of the offspring through whom the Davidic Messiah would come. [57: B-A-G-D, 275. ]

Peter also refers to David in vs. 30 as a prophet, not something we normally think of when we read of David in Scriptures. This is the only description in the NT of David as a prophet. This prophetic motif is found in the DSS (11Q5XXVII, 11). Reference to Davids prophetic speech also occurs in Mark. 12:36 and Acts 1:16.[footnoteRef:58] In Acts 1:16, Peter speaks of the Holy Spirit proclaiming by the mouth of David concerning the replacement of Judas and quotes two psalms (Ps. 69:25; 109:3).[footnoteRef:59] In Heb. 11:32, David is connected with Samuel and the prophets. One also finds that in the Epistle of Barnabas (quoting from Ps. 110:1), the author states that David prophesies here in this passage.[footnoteRef:60] [58: Marshall, Commentary of the NT Use of the OT, 539. ] [59: Joseph A. Fitzmyer, David, Being Therefore A Prophet (Acts 2:30), in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Vol 34 (1972): 332. ] [60: Ibid. ]

Even though David authored many of the psalms, several of these psalms are interpreted by the NT writers from a Christological perspective. In this sense he is a prophet, but not in the sense that we normally think of prophets like the literary or writing prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah). God swore an oath (o(/rk% w)/mosen au)t%= o( qeo\j) to David or literally oathed an oath to him. Peters quote is from Ps. 132:11 (MT, 131:11, LXX). While the LXX reads simply the Lord swore, Peter adds God swore an oath (o(rk%, a dative), which produces a Semitism, the noun here is the equivalent of the Heb. Infinitive absolute.[footnoteRef:61] The promise is made that someone from the fruit of his loins (ek karpou= th=j o)sfu/oj) would sit upon his throne. The assurance of a descendant of David is found in 2 Sam. 7:12 and Ps. 131. The oath made in 2 Chron. 6 that he would be a son of David is assumed to be fulfilled in Solomon. While the Ps. 131 promise is to Davids sons and grandsons sitting on the throne, yet this is a conditional promise (contingent upon their obedience). Later this pledge would attain a messianic interpretation.[footnoteRef:62] David foresaw (proidw\n) these things concerning the resurrection of the Messiah (vs. 31). Peter says the Lord was not left behind in hades, nor was his flesh allowed to see corruption (vs. 31). In vs. 32, Peter declares that God raised Jesus up (a)ne/sthsen) to the right hand of God. The language here is similar to Ps. 117:6 (LXX; 118:16, MT).[footnoteRef:63] Others see Ps. 67:19 (LXX) as being behind the next part of the verse. While this may be true, yet Ps. 117 is the primary OT passage behind this verse.[footnoteRef:64] Peter classifies himself and the rest of the apostles as witnesses. Peter says two events occurred following the resurrection: (1) the Son is exalted at the Fathers right hand and (2) the promise of the Spirit is poured out this day (vs. 33 the promise of the Holy Spirit may harken back to Luke 24:49).[footnoteRef:65] The audience can testify to the coming of the Spirit in what they see and hear. The Messiahs ascent to heaven fulfills the promise in Ps. 110:1 (MT; 109:1, LXX), The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, until I should place your enemies a footstool of your feet (vs. 34-35). The idea of footstool is a metaphor for subjugating ones enemies (Josh. 10:24; 1 Kings 5:3; Isa. 51:23). The idea of right hand is metaphorical for the power and authority given to the Messiah to defeat his enemies. Peter interprets the psalm literally to refer to the Son ascending back to heaven to sit at the Fathers right hand.[footnoteRef:66] The apostle comes to the finality of his sermon where he calls their attention to the fact that the one whom they crucified is both Lord and Christ (vs. 36). [61: Marshall, 539. The LXX reads from the fruit of your belly, while the apostle Peter says the fruit of his loins. Marshall notes that while scholars often say that the concept of the Messiah/Christ is found in the OT, the term itself is not found with this reference, and that this usage developed only later in Jewish literature. By the time the OT was collected and the canon finalized (Lk. 24:44), the term in this and other such OT passages were considered Messianic. Marshall, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 540.] [62: Ibid. ] [63: Ibid.] [64: Ibid., 541. ] [65: Ibid. ] [66: Ibid., 542. ]

Call to Repentance (2:37-42)This is the first time the audience speaks since they originally accuse the apostles of being drunk (vv. 12-15). The preached word convicts the audience (katenu/ghsan th\n kardi/an), pierced to the heart (vs. 37). They ask the apostles, Ti/ proih/swmen (what shall we do, Future Active Indicative)? The audience addresses the apostles as men, brethren. Peter responds to their question by using two imperatives telling them what to do: metanoh/sate (repent or turn you, pl., a First Aorist Active Imperative, 2nd Person Plural) and baptisqh/tw (let each one of you be baptized) in the name of Jesus Christ (e)pi\ t%= o)no/mati )Ihsou= Xristou=). The idea of repent means to change ones mind, going along with the Hebrew concept of turning in the right direction or a change of direction.[footnoteRef:67] Bock states that this is very similar to Peters quote from Joel 2 where the one who responds to God calls on his name (Acts 2:21).[footnoteRef:68] This is the same command Ananias gave to Paul in Acts 22:16. The phrase, in the name, could be a dative of possession, a dative of agency, or a dative of possession (whatever the dative is in this phrase, the genitive is the same). The genitive phrase, of Jesus Christ, could be a genitive of relationship, a genitive of possession, or perhaps a genitive of association.[footnoteRef:69] Although the call is for everyone to be baptized, this is an individual call to turn to God and be immersed. This is perhaps what Peter has in mind when he writes in 1 Peter 3:21 that baptism saves us, but adds that the emphasis there is as much on the attitude behind the act as merely on the act of baptism alone (answer of a good conscience).[footnoteRef:70] [67: Bock, 142. ] [68: Ibid., 117-18. ] [69: Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax Of The New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 71; 137-38. ] [70: Bock, 142. ]

This is to be done in the name of Jesus Christ (e)pi\ t%= o)no/mati )Ihsou= Xristou=), e)pi\ with the dative, perhaps a dative of instrument. Bruce suggests this phrase indicates that the believer who is baptized is confessing or invoking Jesus as Messiah.[footnoteRef:71] Baptizing one into Jesus name also shows the authority Jesus has at Gods right side in heaven,[footnoteRef:72] as Jesus says in Matt. 28:18-20 that all authority is given to him in heaven and earth, or as in the case of in the name (authority) of a prophet (Matt. 10:41).[footnoteRef:73] The name of Jesus is a theme that resonates throughout Acts (Acts 3:6, 16; 4:10, 12, 17-18, 30; 5:28, 40-41; 8:12; 9:16, 21, 27, 28; 15:26; 16:18; 19:13, 17; 21:13; 22:16; 26:9).[footnoteRef:74] Robertson cautions against reading too much into the preposition e)pi\, ei)j, and e)n when used with the name of Jesus. In Acts 10:48, Peter commands they be baptized e)n t%= o)no/mati )Ihsou= Xristou=. In Acts 8:16 those of Samaria had been baptized ei)j to\ o)/noma tou= kuri/ou )Ihsou=. Those at Ephesus were baptized ei)j to\ o)/noma tou= kuri/ou )Ihsou= (Acts 19:5). The idea of into the name of someone is Semitic expression for an act directed toward someone, particularly in worship. The idea into the name of also carries the idea of bringing someone into a relationship: with someone else.[footnoteRef:75] Neither should one read too much into being baptized into the name of Jesus (in Acts) verses in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:18-20).[footnoteRef:76] The interchange between the Father, Son, and even the Holy Spirit shows the unity that exists between them in Luke-Acts.[footnoteRef:77] [71: Bruce, 76. ] [72: Bock, 143. ] [73: Robertson, 35. ] [74: Bock, 143.] [75: Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 182-83.] [76: Robertson, 35. ] [77: Bock, 143. ]

The purpose is ei)j a)/fesin tw=n a(martiw=n u(mw=n, for the remission of your sins. One finds a similar phrase twice in the Gospel of Luke. In Luke 24:46-47, Jesus tells his disciples, And he said to them, thus it has been written the Christ should suffer and rise from the death the third day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. An alternate reading of Luke 24:47 reads repentance for the forgiveness of sins (meta/noian ei)j a)/fesin a(martiw=n).[footnoteRef:78] The noun form for forgiveness, meta/noia, is found ten times in Luke-Acts out of seventeen occurrences in the entire NT (see Luke 1:77; 3:3; 4:18 [2x]; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18).[footnoteRef:79] Luke also records (as well as Mark and Matthew) that John the Baptist went into all the region of the Jordan preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (ba/ptisma metanoi/aj ei)j a)/fesin a(martiw=n), Luke 3:3. Nearly every passage where the term forgiveness occurs in the Gospels is a summary of what Jesus mission is about (as in Luke 3:3, where forgiveness concerns Johns preaching that prepares the way for the coming Messiah).[footnoteRef:80] Polhill suggests that the preposition ei)j here means for the purpose of or on the basis of, meaning that baptism is on the basis of the forgiveness of sins. Even Brooks and Winbery render the preposition ei)j as because of here in Acts 2:38 and also in a similar passage in Matt. 3:11.[footnoteRef:81] Bock points out that this is not likely since this is not the normal force of ei)j.[footnoteRef:82] [78: The Greek NT, 318. See also Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, 188. On internal grounds it is difficult to decide between the two readings, for both are in accord with Lukan usage (e.g. Lk 3.3 baptisma metanoiaj ei)j a)/fesin, and Ac 5.31 dou=nai meta/noian t%= )Israh\l kai\ a)/fesin a(martiw=n). On the basis of (a) what was taken to be slightly superior exterior attestation, and (b) the probability that, in view of the following ei)j, copyists would have been more likely to alter the first ei)j to kai/, rather than vice versa, a majority of the Committee preferred the reading ei)j.] [79: Bock, 143. ] [80: Ibid. ] [81: Brooks and Winbery, 60. ] [82: Ibid., 144. ]

The promise Peter makes here is twofold: the promise of forgiveness of sins and the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Holy Spirit is to be taken as an epexegetical genitive, in other words, the gift which is the Spirit (rather than the gift the Spirit gives).[footnoteRef:83] The question is not do Christians receive the Spirit or not at baptism. All four occurrences of the gift (dwrea/n, Accusative of dwrea/)[footnoteRef:84] in Acts (2:38; 8:20; 10:45; 11:17; perhaps also implied in 5:32) is in the context of those who respond to the preaching of the word.[footnoteRef:85] The big question is whether there is a difference in an indwelling of the Spirit (non-miraculous) and the outpouring of the Spirit (baptism of the Spirit, miraculous empowerment) as evidence on the apostle and the household of Cornelius (Acts 10), and on those whom the apostles lay their hands. This author must admit this is a deep subject and perhaps too deep to get into in this paper. We may be asking questions that Luke never considered. Only when one takes the whole of the NT can many of these questions be answered. [83: Ibid., 144. ] [84: B-A-G-D, 210. ] [85: Ibid. ]

According to vs. 39, this promise of salvation and the Spirit is not only for those at Pentecost, but also for their children and pa=sin toi=j ei)j makra/n, for all far off/away, indicating those of distant lands (Jews and Gentiles). Does Peters statement here harken back to Jesus commission given in Acts 1:8 (until the ends if the earth)? Bruce sees a fulfillment in this promise going back to Isa. 57:19 (peace to those far and near) and Joel 2:32 (the call of the remnant).[footnoteRef:86] This promise does seem to begin fulfilling the great commission of the Gospels. Then vs. 40 summarizes the rest of Peters message (Luke is fond of such summary statements) by saying, and with more words he testified (diemartu/rato, First Aorist Middle Indicative, from diamartu/romai, meaning here to testify or bear witness to something) and was exhorting (pareka/lei, from parakale/w, Imperfect Active Indicative, to summon; exhort, entreat) them [footnoteRef:87] The message to them: Be saved from this crooked generation. The verb saved (from sw/zw) is a First Aorist Passive Imperative, 2nd Person Plural. Why would the imperative here be in the passive rather than middle (save yourselves)? Probably due to the fact that God is the main agent acting throughout the speech.[footnoteRef:88] The term crooked (th=j skolia=j, from skolio\j), can mean crooked in a literal sense, or crooked in a figurative sense, unscrupulous, dishonest.[footnoteRef:89] This is the only time skolio\j appears in the NT and here as an ethical genitive, alluding to a generation that is ethically crooked, spiritually off the path to God, and thus subject to judgment.[footnoteRef:90] [86: Bruce, 78. ] [87: Robertson, 36-7; B-A-G-D, 617. ] [88: Bock, 146; Robertson, 37. ] [89: B-A-G-D, 756. ] [90: Bock, 146. ]

In verse 41, Luke records the response of the crowd. The phrase, oi( men\ ou)=n (then they) is common in the book of Acts either without antithesis (as is the case in 1:6; 5:41; 8:4, 25; 9:31; 11:10; 16:5) or with antithesis as in 3:41 (and also in 8:25; 13:4; 17:17; 23:31; 25:4). Robertson notes that the conjunction ou)=n connects or points to what precedes as the result of Peters sermon, while the me/n points forward to what follows.[footnoteRef:91] Those who responded welcomed his word (a)podeca/menoi, from a)pode/xomai to welcome, receive someone; or to recognize, acknowledge, or to praise someone, an Aorist Middle Participle). Luke notes that the respondents were baptized (e)bapti/sqhsan First Aorist Passive Indicative). There were three thousand souls who were added to (First Aorist Passive from prosti/qhmi) on that day (dative of time). This probably has reference to being added to the original 120 disciples who met in the upper room.[footnoteRef:92] [91: Robertson, 37. ] [92: Ibid., 37. ]

The post-baptism response of the new disciples is found in verse 42. And they were attaching themselves to (h)=san de\ proskarterou=ntej). Robertson refers to this construction as a Periphrastic active imperfect,[footnoteRef:93] with the Imperfect Active Indicative of ei)mi\ plus the Present Active Participle of proskartere/w (Nom. Ms. Pl., meaning to attach oneself to with the dative of the person, to busy oneself with dative of the thing, or to hold fast or continue in something).[footnoteRef:94] The things the early disciples were holding themselves fast to are all in the dative and could be datives of respect or reference: in reference or respect to the teaching of the apostles (t$= didax$= tw=n a)posto/lwn), and in fellowship (t$= koinwni/#), and in breaking of bread (t$= kla/sei tou= a)/rtou), and in prayers (tai=j proseuxai=j). [93: Robertson, 37. ] [94: B-A-G-D, 715. ]

The teaching of the apostles is that which builds upon the teaching established by Christ (Eph. 3:20; 4:11-14). Since the only Scriptures they have are the OT Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16-17), there is the need for the public instruction to the new disciples. In time this apostolic teaching took written shape in the NT scriptures.[footnoteRef:95] The fellowship is the communion or partnership we share in the blood of Jesus (Phil. 2:1) and in the sharing of the work of the gospel (Phil. 1:5). We also share in the fellowship in the body and blood of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16), which leads us to the next area of devotion and that is the breaking of bread. The term kla/sij is found only in Lukes writings in the NT (Luke 24:35; Acts 2:42). The verb form, kla/w, is scattered throughout the NT (as in Jesus breaking the loaves in Matt. 14:19 and other places). The problem, as Robertson points out, is the question of whether Luke is referring to a common meal (Luke 24:30) or in reference to the Lords Supper (Luke 22:19)?[footnoteRef:96] Many suppose that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lords Supper at first, a combination called agapai or love feasts. This did lead to some abuse of the Lords Supper (see 1 Cor. 11:20). However, Luke seems to indicate in Acts 20:7 that the early disciples seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lords Supper.[footnoteRef:97] The reference to the prayers of the early Christians seems to point to special or specific times for prayer (Acts 10) as in the temple (see Acts 3:1) or in their homes (Acts 4:23). [95: Bruce, 79. ] [96: Robertson, 38. ] [97: Ibid. ]

ConclusionThe first of the great speeches recorded by Luke in the book of Acts is by the apostle Peter. No wonder Jesus told him at Caesarea Philippi that he would be given the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16). Peter is given the privilege of opening the door for disciples to enter into the kingdom on this festival day of Pentecost. He refutes the charge that they are drunk and instead points to the fact that the events that are witnessing are a fulfillment of OT prophecy. Luke also opens our eyes to the fact that David is not only the poet of Israel, but he is also a prophet who foresaw the death and resurrection of the Lord. The book of Acts shows that nothing takes place without Gods divine hand and plan. The Spirit is poured out upon the apostles to enlighten them and guide them into all truth (John 14). The promise that they would be empowered from on high (Luke 24) is fulfilled in Acts 2. Yet the theme of faith, repentance, and baptism for the forgiveness of sins, which began with Johns ministry and continued with our Lord, is carried on by the apostles in Acts. God used miracles to show that Jesus was from God, but they crucified him. The pentacle of miracles is when God raised Jesus from the tomb. The proof from the miracles, the prophecies from the OT Scriptures, and the risen Lord is what convicted those 3,000 who were baptized that day. We may not have Peters entire sermon recorded by Luke, but enough to know that he used the OT to prove Jesus is the fulfillment of all OT prophecies. This paper helps us understand Acts from the perspective of the early apostolic and missionary preaching. Perhaps the 21st century church would do well to reconsider what preaching is like in Acts and how we can use their hermeneutical approach today to reach a similar pagan and skeptical world.

BibliographyBauer, Walter; William F. Ardnt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker. A Greek-English Lexicon Of The New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press, 1979.Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 4th rev. ed. Edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph. Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblestiftung, 1990. Bock, Darrell L. Acts. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.Brooks, James A. and Carlton L. Winbery. Syntax Of New Testament Greek. Lanham, MD.: University Press of America, Inc., 1979.Bruce, F.F. The Book of Acts, The English Text With Introduction, Exposition And Notes. The New Interntational Commentary On The New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.Codex Bezae. http://codexbezae.perso.sfr.fr/cb/ac/ac.php?chapter=28-lang=a. Accessed July 31, 2015.Dana, H.E. and Julius R. Mantey. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. Toronto, Ontario: The Macmillian Company, 1927, 1955.Ferguson, Everett. Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.Fitzmyer, Joseph A. ""David, Being Therefore A Prophet ..." (Acts 2:30)."." The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972): 332.Horner, Jerry. "The Credibility And The Eschatology Of Peter's Speech At Pentecost." Pneuma: The Journal Of The Society For Pentecostal Studies, Spring 1980: 25.Marshall, I. Howard. Acts. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester, England/Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity/Eerdmans, 1980, Repr. 2002.Marshall, I. Howard. "Acts." In Commentary in the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, edited by G.K. Beale and D.A. Carson, 513-601. Grand Rapids/Nottingham, England: Baker Academic/Apollos, 2007.Meredith, Don L., Supplement To Turabian 8th Edition. Memphis: Harding School of Theology: 2013. http://hst.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Turabian-400-BW.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2015.Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, A Companion Volume to the United Bible Socities' Greek New Testament (third edition). London/NY: United Bible Socities, 1971.Rahlfs, A. Septuaginta. 9th. Stuttgart: WYrttembergische Bibelanstalt, 1935, Repr. 1971. http://unbound.biola.edu. Accessed July 1, 2015.Rienecker, Fritz. A Linguistic Key To The Greek New Testament. Regency Reference Library. Edited by Jr. Cleon L. Rogers. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976, 1980.Robertson, A.T. Word Pictures In The New Testament, Vol III, The Acts Of The Apostles. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930.The Greek New Testament. 3rd ed. Edited by Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce Metzger, and Allen WIkgren. Stuttgart: United Bible Socities, 1983.Trull, Gregory V. "Peter's Interpretation Of Psalm 16:8-11 In Acts 2:25-32." Bibliotheca Sacra, no. 161 (October-December 2004): 433.Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax Of The New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.. The Basics Of New Testament Syntax, An Intermediate Grammar: The Abridgment of Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

AppendixCodex Bezae of Acts Chapter Two

1 .2 :3 , ' ,4 , . 5 , :6 , .7

, ;8 ; 9 , [.] , [.] , ,10 [.] , , , 11 , . 12 , , ; 13 .14 , [.] . 15 , [.] , 16

[.] 17 [.] , , , [.] , [.] , [..] : 18 [...] [...]. 19 [...] 20 [..]. 21 . 22 , : , [] ' , , 23 , 24 , ' : 25 , ,

. 26 , ' : 27 , . 28 , . 29 , , ' : 30 , , 31[....] . 32 , . 33 [..] . 34 ,

, , 35 [.] . 36 [.] , ,, .37 , [.] [.] , , ; 38 , , [.], : 39 . 40 , , 41 , . 42

, . 43 , [.] . 44 , 45 : 46 [.] , [..] , , 47 . ' .[footnoteRef:98] [98: Copy of Codex Bezae, Acts chapter two. http://codexbezae.perso.sfr.fr/cb/ac/ac.php?chapter=28-lang=a. Accessed July 31, 2015. ]