That Word Above All Earthly Powers: The Book of ActsGrace Community Church Sunday SchoolActs 2

The Spirit, poured out as Jesus promised, enables the proclamation of God’s mighty deeds to the nations (2:1-13).

John prophesied that Jesus would baptize with the Spirit. Jesus promised to send the Spirit from the Father. Jesus commanded the disciples to wait in Jerusalem until the Spirit gave them power. Now, fifty days after Passover—Pentecost—the Spirit is indeed sent.

Throughout the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit’s ministry is one of life-giving and beautification. It is the breath—or Spirit—of life that enters Adam’s nostrils so that he becomes a nephesh ḥayyah (“a living being”). It is the Spirit that gave the heavens their beauty (Job 26:13). It was the Spirit that enabled Bezalel and Oholiab to make and oversee the creation of the beautiful furnishings and structures of the tabernacle. It was the Spirit that came upon men and they prophesied.

Originally, Pentecost was celebrated as the celebration of the firstfruits of the harvest,1 but during the intertestamental period, it was also associated with the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai.2 That was believed to have been fifty days after the Exodus.

One of the themes of Acts is that it is the continuation of Luke’s first volume, the Third Gospel. The parallels between the advent and ministry of Jesus and the Spirit are interesting. Marshall notes that the account of the Spirit’s coming in Acts corresponds to the birth narrative in Luke.3 Jesus promised that they would receive power from the Spirit, and they would be His witnesses from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth (1:8). Immediately, the Spirit puts them to His work. Those upon whom the Spirit came in power were the firstfruits of the great harvest of the age; all those who followed would receive the promise of the Spirit (even without the accompanying signs).4

When the Israelites arrived at Mount Sinai, Moses went up the mountain, and then came down again with the law. Here, Jesus has gone up into heaven in the ascension, and – so Luke wants us to understand – he is now coming down again, not with a written law carved on tablets of stone, but with the dynamic energy of the law, designed to be written on human hearts (Wright, 22).

The 120 were gathered together, as was their custom, but this day was anything but customary or routine. There was a sound like wind, a vision of flames, and the voice of their speaking in foreign languages. Once again, we 1 For a first-century Jew, Pentecost was the fiftieth day after Passover. It was an agricultural festival. It was the day when farmers brought the first sheaf of wheat from the crop, and offered it to God, partly as a sign of gratitude and partly as a prayer that all the rest of the crop, too, would be safely gathered in (Wright, 21).2 Jewish tradition associated wind, fire and voices with Mount Sinai, the three phenomena which he is about to describe (Stott, KL 996-997).3 Its placing in Acts corresponds to the position of the birth of Jesus in the Gospel, and its significance is that the church is now equipped for the task of witness and mission, and proceeds straightaway to undertake it (Marshall, 67).4 Then, 50 days after Passover, they came to Mount Sinai, where Moses received the law. Pentecost, the fiftieth day, isn’t (in other words) just about the ‘first fruits’, the sheaf which says the harvest has begun. It’s about God giving to his redeemed people the way of life by which they must now carry out his purposes (Wright, 21).

[T]his story, of the apostles being filled with the spirit and then going on to bear powerful witness to Jesus and his resurrection and to win converts from the very first day, as a sign that this is like the sheaf which is offered to God as the sign of the great harvest to come (Wright, 22).

see the theme of persuasive evidence highlighted: multiple people having a multi-sensory experience at the same time.5

Wright helpfully cautions us against making too much of the perceptible at the expense of the intangible:But of course the first day of Pentecost, and the experience of God’s spirit from that day to this, can no more be reduced to theological formulae and interesting Old Testament echoes than you can reduce a hurricane to a list of diagrams on a meteorologist’s chart. It’s important that someone somewhere is tracking the hurricane and telling us what it’s doing, but when it comes to Pentecost it’s far more important that you’re out there in the wind, letting it sweep through your life, your heart, your imagination, your powers of speech, and transform you from a listless or lifeless believer into someone whose heart is on fire with the love of God. Those images of wind and fire are of course what Luke says it was like on the first day (Wright, 22).

The onrushing of the Spirit is evidenced most notably in the speaking in other languages that makes Pentecost so famous. As we have come to expect, Luke takes pains to note the importance of the details for impressing on our hearts the wonder and awe of what happened.

The sound of the disciples calling out loud bewildered the crowd since they could not understand how Galileans could speak in their own languages…What was significant was that the various vernacular languages of these peoples were being spoken (Marshall, 70, emphasis original).

Yet the speakers were known to be Galileans (7), who had a reputation for being uncultured. They also ‘had difficulty pronouncing gutturals and had the habit of swallowing syllables when speaking; so they were looked down upon by the people of Jerusalem as being provincial’. It is not surprising, therefore, that the crowd’s reaction was one of bewilderment (6) (Stott, KL 1036-1039).

The emphasis Luke makes here is that the 120 are not speaking textbook-proper, standardized languages. They’re speaking dialects, the “vernacular languages” as Marshall puts it. Think of the differences between British English and American English, or even Northeastern American and Southern American. That’s what the 120 were speaking. They were speaking the particular, nuanced language of at least 15 different countries or regions in the world. Perfectly.

In college, my German professor’s area of expertise was linguistics. She told us one time in class that after a certain age, it’s difficult to the point of impossible to learn new sounds for a language. German, for example, has no “th” sound. You make the sound by putting your tongue between your teeth and blowing out. German has no such sound, so without learning it at a young age, a native speaker can’t easily make that sound. She even said she tried to teach a friend by holding his tongue to force him to make the sound. He couldn’t do it.

Galileans were not cosmopolitan jet-setters, fluent in a bunch of languages. They knew Greek (because everybody did) and Aramaic. Their difficulty with “gutturals” and “swallowing syllables” can be evidenced by the use of “Shibboleth” as a password during the judges. Certain tribes could not pronounce the “sh” in the letter shin; they could only pronounce it as an “s” sound. It served as a password to identify where you were from.

5 The Spirit of God came upon them. And his coming was accompanied by three supernatural signs— a sound, a sight and strange speech… The noise was not wind, but sounded like it; the sight was not fire but resembled it; and the speech was in languages which were not ordinary but in some way ‘other’. Again, three of their higher senses were affected, in that they heard the wind-like sound, saw the fire-like apparition and spoke the ‘other’ languages. Yet what they experienced was more than sensory; it was significant. So they sought to understand it (Stott, KL 998-999, 1004-1007).

The language, it should be noted, is that of analogy— a sound like that of wind— and indicates that we have to do with a supernatural occurrence. The symbolism is reminiscent of Old Testament theophanies (2 Sam. 22:16; Job 37:10; Ezek. 13:13): the wind is a sign of God’s presence as Spirit (Marshall, 68).

So, these uncultured, untraveled Galileans suddenly had the ability to speak fluently the languages of these 15 regions—not simply in terms of vocabulary, not simply in terms of perfect pronunciation, but also in terms of nuanced, idiomatic dialects.

The triumphant advance of the gospel is not hindered by the barriers of language. The God who confused the languages to cause dispersal at Babel can reunite the peoples through languages. Luke does seem to be emphatically calling us back to Genesis, not only to the Babel account in Genesis 11, but the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 by his listing of the regions represented that day.6

The whole question of Acts 1, you remember, was of how God would fulfil the promise to extend his kingdom, his saving, sovereign rule, not only in Israel but through Israel, to reach the rest of the world…God is dramatically signalling that his promises to Abraham are being fulfilled, and the whole human race is going to be addressed with the good news of what has happened in and through Jesus…Luke gives the list of where they came from in a great sprawling sweep, covering tens of thousands of square miles, from Parthia and Mesopotamia in the north and east to Rome in the west and Egypt and Arabia in the south, together with the island of Crete (Wright, 28-29).

What began in the house where they met clearly spilled outside into the streets and common areas of Jerusalem, quickly drawing a crowd from the swollen population of pilgrims. They were all amazed at the miracle that was evidently happening before them. Some tried to laugh it off as the drunken ravings of lunatics, but this was not a widespread opinion—or even one that believable to those that said it. The arrival of the Spirit in power was unsettling, frightening even, and some looked for ways to rationalize it in their minds to alleviate the fear within them.

The Spirit’s coming is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy (2:14-36).

This incredible event—the coming of the Spirit—was a marvel that needed explaining, given the reactions to it. The full company of the Twelve stood up at the head of the crowd, and Peter preached the first Christian sermon to the masses. Peter’s sermon is the first instance of Jesus continuing to teach in Acts.7

This event was both something new and old. It was new in that it was the next stage in the unfolding of the Gospel story; it was old in that it was promised centuries before. Peter quotes the prophet Joel to make this point.

The passage from Joel (2:28-32, to be exact) is interesting because it was a promise of things to come in the last days. Peter is saying that the coming of the Spirit inaugurated the last days spoken of in Joel (and John’s letters echo that same reality; cf. 1 John 2:19).

6 It symbolized a new unity in the Spirit transcending racial, national and linguistic barriers. So Luke is at pains to emphasize the cosmopolitan character of the crowd, not least by the expression ‘from every nation under heaven’ (5). Although all the nations of the world were not present literally, they were representatively. For Luke includes in his list descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth, and gives us in Acts 2 a ‘Table of the Nations’ comparable to the one in Genesis 10 (Stott, KL 1098-1101, italics original).

Nothing could have demonstrated more clearly than this the multi-racial, multi-national, multi-lingual nature of the kingdom of Christ. Ever since the early church fathers, commentators have seen the blessing of Pentecost as a deliberate and dramatic reversal of the curse of Babel. At Babel human languages were confused and the nations were scattered; in Jerusalem the language barrier was supernaturally overcome as a sign that the nations would now be gathered together in Christ, prefiguring the great day when the redeemed company will be drawn ‘from every nation, tribe, people and language’. Besides, at Babel earth proudly tried to ascend to heaven, whereas in Jerusalem heaven humbly descended to earth (Stott, KL 1106-1111).7 Luke is true to his intention of recording what Jesus continued (after his ascension) both ‘to do and to teach’ (1:1). No fewer than nineteen significant Christian speeches occur in his second volume (omitting the non-Christian speeches by Gamaliel, the Ephesian town clerk and Tertullus)… Approximately 20% of Luke’s text is devoted to addresses by Peter and Paul; if Stephen’s speech is added, the percentage rises to about 25% (Stott, KL 1115-1117, 1119-1120).

Remember the disciples’ question in chapter 1 about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel? All that had happened seemed to them to be the end of all things: the Messiah had arrived, the resurrection had begun, and it was the dawn of a new age. What else was left?8

Remember, too, Jesus’ answer to them: it’s not for you to know dates and times, but it is for you to receive the gift of the Spirit. And now, Jesus gives them the gift of the Spirit to inaugurate the last days.

The last days have been since Pentecost. We’re waiting for the last of the last, but the last days are here and have been.

Before Pentecost, the Spirit had come upon select people for select purposes and distinct periods of time. Joel looked forward to the day when the Spirit would come upon all people for all time. Peter says, “You here are witnesses of the reality that Joel longed to see.”9

An important side-point is raised here. Peter gives us the interpretation of Joel 2. When we read Joel 2, we’re not reading or understanding it correctly unless we read it as pointing forward to Pentecost.

Not every Old Testament passage is directly quoted or interpreted in the New, but whenever one is, our understanding of that Old Testament passage is forever changed. The Holy Spirit has, in each case, given us clarity as to exactly how He wanted us to understand both passages.

Thus, Pentecost was the outpouring of the Spirit, but why this way? Why now? What’s the connection between wind and fire and speaking in tongues and Joel? As every good preacher does in every good sermon, Peter makes a beeline for Jesus.10

Peter starts talking about Jesus, but he doesn’t explain the connection with the coming of the Spirit until verse 33.11 Peter’s description of Jesus is remarkable in several ways.

First, notice how Peter assumes everyone knows who Jesus is and what happened six weeks ago (and the 3-5 years previous). The theme of definitive evidence for the Gospel appears again:

“This Jesus of Nazareth was a man attested to you by God with miracles, wonders, and signs that God did among you through him, just as you yourselves know” (2:22 CSB, emphasis added).

The Father attested to the identity of His Son by the “miracles, signs, and wonders” done through Jesus. These were done publicly, and the crowds gathered for Pentecost were well aware of this (“just as you yourselves know”).

If Peter or the Twelve or even the 120 were trying to make up “fake news” about Jesus, this is the dumbest possible thing to do. Peter invites them to remember what they all knew to have happened. It’s possible—even likely—that many of these same people were in Jerusalem for Passover. Many would have witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion firsthand. Some may have laid palm branches and coats on Palm Sunday. Others may have shouted themselves hoarse with “Crucify him!” Either way, Jesus’ identity and reputation were well known.

8 It is the unanimous conviction of the New Testament authors that Jesus inaugurated the last days or Messianic age, and that the final proof of this was the outpouring of the Spirit, since this was the Old Testament promise of promises for the end-time (Stott, KL 1194-1195).9 Peter regards Joel’s prophecy as applying to the last days, and claims that his hearers are now living in the last days. God’s final act of salvation has begun to take place.

The first and main theme of the prophecy is that God is going to pour out his Spirit upon all people, i.e. upon all kinds of people and not just upon the prophets, kings and priests, as had been the case in Old Testament times (Marshall, 73).10 Peter explores more deeply the significance of the event. He traces the gift of the Spirit back to Jesus (Marshall, 71).11 The best way to understand Pentecost, however, is not through the Old Testament prediction, but through the New Testament fulfilment, not through Joel but through Jesus (Stott, KL 1224-1226).

Second, Peter has no qualms whatsoever attributing Jesus’ death to the Father’s will and the people’s wickedness in the same breath.12 What happened was entirely God’s will, and it was entirely wicked. Those present were guilty of crucifying God’s man, and Peter does not let them off the hook. Divine sovereignty is no excuse or scapegoat for sin.

Third, Peter quotes again from the Old Testament to make his point. This time, he quotes Psalm 16 to show that the resurrection of Jesus—of which they were witnesses—was the necessary and only outcome of Jesus’ death. It was impossible for death to lay claim to Jesus, and Psalm 16 explains why.

David prophesied about his Son, the Messiah. It was David’s Son who would not suffer decay or abandonment to Sheol, the place of the dead. Obviously, David had to be speaking about someone other than himself, since he himself died and did decay, and the evidence is right there in his tomb.

The comparison Peter makes is powerful. In essence, he says, “Compare the tombs. Just compare the tombs. David’s is occupied. He died. He’s still dead. His bones are still there, and everybody knows where to find them. Jesus’ is empty. He died. He’s not still dead. His bones are not there, and everybody knows where to find them if they were. He’s not there.13

Jesus was attested by the Father, crucified according to His plan, and raised from the dead by His power. Finally, Jesus has ascended to the Father’s right hand, where He was given the promised Holy Spirit—the same Holy Spirit who was sent this very day, the evidence of which is plain to all.

Peter’s point, now that he’s finally made it there, is simple: Jesus is the promised Messiah. Only the Messiah is attested the way Jesus was. Only the Messiah dies in the place of sinners. Only the Messiah can overcome death as God promised. Only the Messiah sends the Spirit. Only God can send God. God sent God once already, and now He’s done it again.14

Peter’s conclusion is that all Israel should now be assured that this Jesus, whom they had repudiated and crucified, God had made both Lord and Christ. Not of course that Jesus became Lord and Christ only at the time of his ascension, for he was (and claimed to be) both throughout his public ministry. It is rather that now God exalted him to be in reality and power what he already was by right (Stott, KL 1268-1271).

The Spirit gives and grows life in the Church (2:37-47).

The climax of Peter’s sermon is the declaration that Jesus is the Lord and the Messiah, but it comes with a targeted barb to the crowd: the Jesus who is Lord and Messiah is the one whom you crucified. There is a sentence of guilt hanging over all. Perhaps some or even many have felt the pangs of conscience over these last few weeks. Perhaps some never thought another thing about Jesus until now. In either case, the Spirit makes His presence known to the people, not just to the 120, by convicting of sin and by giving life.

12 Here we have the paradox of divine predestination and human freewill in its strongest form. Even in putting Jesus to death, the Jews were simply fulfilling what God had already determined must take place and indeed had foretold in the prophetic writings (Marshall, 75).13 Since he died and was buried, and since for the Jews to be buried was the same thing as to suffer corruption and descend to Sheol, it followed that he himself was abandoned to Hades (the Greek word for Hebrew Sheol) and suffered physical corruption. Peter was entitled to make his point with confidence; after all, the proof of David’s burial was visible for all to see. If David was not speaking about himself, it followed that he must have been speaking prophetically (Marshall, 76).14 Since God had raised Jesus from death, it followed that he was the Messiah, and it was in consequence of this that he had poured out the Spirit (Luke 24: 49; John 20: 22). Thus the resurrection of Jesus and the pouring out of the Spirit both testified that Jesus was the Lord and Messiah. When the audience demanded to know what this implied, Peter urged them to be baptized in the name of Jesus so that their sins might be forgiven and they might share in the gift of the Spirit which was freely promised to them (Marshall, 72).

The change in the people is remarkable. At first, there was a general surprise or curiosity accompanied by the smart alecks who say they’re drunk. Now, however, the crowd is hanging on Peter’s words as their last hope—which it is.15

The people ask in desperation, “Then what do we do?” Peter’s answer is beautiful in its power and simplicity: repent16 and believe. Once again, Jesus is still teaching the same message. It’s the same message that John preached. It’s the same message Jesus preached. It’s the same message we preach today.

In Acts, repentance, faith, and baptism are so closely linked together that they’re used almost interchangeably. It’s as though the mention of one automatically assumes the other. I. Howard Marshall puts it this way: “repentance and faith are the two sides of the same coin… Since elsewhere repentance and faith are closely linked (20:21; Mark 1:15), it is certain that, whatever else it may be, baptism is an expression of faith” (Marshall, 81).

The response of the Gospel message is to turn away from your sins (repentance), trust in the forgiveness offered freely by Jesus (faith), and declare the newness of life worked in you by the Spirit (baptism).

And both [i.e., repentance and faith] are signified by baptism in Christ’s name, which means ‘by his authority, acknowledging his claims, subscribing to his doctrines, engaging in his service, and relying on his merits’. Then they would receive two free gifts of God— the forgiveness of their sins (even of the sin of rejecting God’s Christ) and the gift of the Holy Spirit (to regenerate, indwell, unite and transform them)… Everyone God calls to himself through Christ receives both gifts. The gifts of God are coextensive with the call of God (Stott, KL 1282-1285, 1291).

The Spirit makes alive what was dead. Here He is doing again what He did for Adam in the Garden—making dust and clay become alive by His power. Throughout the Old Testament and Jesus’ ministry, the Spirit was promised to come (remember Joel 2 and John 14-16). In chapter 1, Jesus called the Holy Spirit the “promise of the Father.” Peter now announces the beginning of the Gospel’s victory tour in the very power of the Holy Spirit whose power they had witnessed that very day: the promise—that is, the Holy Spirit, who brings repentance, faith, and forgiveness—is not for just a few. The promise from Joel was that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord would be saved and have the Spirit poured out on them. There are no barriers from sex, age, race, location, anything.

“For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call” (2:39). Those who are called—now, and in succeeding generations, Jews and Gentiles alike—are all welcome to receive the Spirit and the forgiveness He brings through Jesus’ atonement.

The point of the phrase is rather to express the unlimited mercy of God which embraces the hearers and subsequent generations of their descendants and in addition all that are far off (Isa. 57:19; Eph. 2:13, 17), a phrase which certainly includes Jews scattered throughout the world and (in Luke’s eyes, whether or not Peter had yet reached this insight) the Gentiles also; a reference to the Gentiles is highly probable in view of the rabbinic understanding of the phrase in Isaiah 57:19, which is shared by Paul (Eph. 2:13, 17). In all cases, however, the promise is mediated by the call of God— and with these words Peter rounds off the quotation from Joel 2:32 with which his discourse had begun. The stress is on the primacy of God’s call and the graciousness of his invitation to all mankind (Marshall, 81-82, italics original).

15 Peter’s hearers took his words as applying to them personally. Many of them had perhaps tacitly agreed with the action of their leaders in putting Jesus to death. Peter’s revelation of the status and dignity of Jesus came as a drastic shock to them, and they were pierced to the heart by what he said (Marshall, 80).16 The word indicates a change of direction in a person’s life rather than simply a mental change of attitude or a feeling of remorse; it signifies a turning away from a sinful and godless way of life (Marshall, 80).

Luke has given us the meat of Peter’s sermon, but not a full transcript. Peter’s sermon included other calls to repentance that they would flee from the sinfulness of their generation.17

The result of Peter’s preaching in the power of the Holy Spirit was that 3,000 people believed and were baptized that day.18 The Spirit gave life to dead souls and thus began the life-giving ministry of regeneration—the triumphant march of the Gospel of Jesus, victorious over sin and death and darkness.

It’s important to point out that the evidence of the Spirit’s presence and work in the 3,000 is the fact of their repenting, believing, and being baptized. Luke gives no indication whatsoever that the 3,000 experienced speaking in tongues or other “Pentecostal” phenomenon. Sinners dead in sin were made alive in Christ that day, and that’s the greatest miracle and evidence of the Spirit’s work. 19

The Spirit’s work of giving life was (and always is) accompanied by His work of growing life within the Church, both individually and corporately. Luke finishes the chapter by summarizing what life looked like for those repentant, baptized believers.

The life of the Church was one made up of devotion to four activities: the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, the Lord’s Supper, and prayer.20 They were characterized by loving generosity, joyful and sincere hearts, and fervent evangelism.

All the people were in awe of what had happened. The evidence of changed lives and loves was right before them. The apostles were performing “wonders and signs”—the very same thing Jesus did, according to Peter (2:22).21

The simple, grateful joy of the early Church was one of their distinctives, and it carried a powerful apologetic force. The Roman culture of hedonism and selfishness contrasted sharply with the grateful, selfless delight in Jesus, His people, and His good gifts. People stood in awe of the early church, because the presence of Jesus—by way of His Spirit—was shown in their repentance, faith, and the joy and peace they possessed because of the gifts of the Holy Spirit and forgiveness of sins.

The rest of the New Testament’s instruction about church and corporate worship is simply an explanation and elaboration of these four activities.

The early Church devoted itself to the Apostles’ teaching. Those called by Jesus to safeguard and spread His message do so, and the people submit to that teaching out of obedience to Jesus and in honor of His call upon those who were apostles.

Since the teaching of the apostles has come down to us in its definitive form in the New Testament, contemporary devotion to the apostles’ teaching will mean submission to the authority of the New Testament. A Spirit-filled church is a New Testament church, in the sense that it studies and submits to New Testament instruction. The Spirit of God leads the people of God to submit to the Word of God (Stott, KL 1362-1365).

17 ‘Perverse generation’ is an Old Testament phrase for the people of Israel who rebelled against God in the wilderness (Deut. 32:5) and is applied in the New Testament to those who reject Jesus (Phil. 2:15; cf. Luke 9:41; 11:29; Heb. 3:10) (Marshall, 82).18 It would have been perfectly possible for a crowd of that size and greater to hear Peter in the open air (if John Wesley and George Whitefield could be heard, so could Peter), and if the other disciples shared in the actual baptizing, there would have been plenty of time to accomplish the task (Marshall, 82).19 The body of Christ in Jerusalem multiplied twenty-six times, from 120 to 3,120. They must also, according to Peter’s promise, have received forgiveness and the Spirit, although this time apparently with no supernatural signs. At least Luke makes no mention of phenomena like wind or fire, or of languages (Stott, KL 1299-1301).20 [A] case can be made out that they are in fact the four elements which characterized a Christian gathering in the early church, and on the whole this is the preferable view (Marshall, 83).21 Wonders and signs— the words used are those which were also used to describe the mighty works of Jesus (2:22)— were being wrought by the apostles, and Luke will shortly relate specific examples (Marshall, 84).

The Church also devotes itself to the apostles’ teaching by preaching the word (2 Timothy 4:2) and by consistently reading the Word together publicly (1 Timothy 4:13).

Fellowship is seen in the Church’s singing (we teach, admonish, and encourage one another through our songs) as well as the one-another commands. We also fellowship with the saints by taking up a collection to provide for their needs, thus joining in their ministry, even if we’re not physically present.

When the saints take the Lord’s Supper together, they confess—together—the Lord’s death and His certain return. We confess our unity as the one body of Christ, joining with the saints of all ages and places.

When the saints gather, they pray for one another and for their leaders.

The radical generosity of the early Church has garnered much discussion. Contrary to the opinions of many (and fears of others), the Church was not a socialist commune. There was no abolition of private property here.

First of all, their possessions and property was sold so that the proceeds could fund the needs of others. You have to own something that is truly yours to sell it.22

Second, there is voluntary self-sacrifice motivated by a Spirit-changed heart here, not the compulsory “re-accommodation” of resources required in communism or socialism.23

Ultimately, Luke’s portrayal of the Church is one of vibrant joy, love, and power. Their testimony was not only the historical reality of Jesus’ death and resurrection, but also of the radical changes in their lives.

As the Christians were seen and heard by the other people in Jerusalem, their activities formed an opportunity for witness. Once again Luke refers to the process of becoming a Christian as being saved, i.e. from belonging to the sinful people around who were under God’s judgment for their rejection of the Messiah (2:40, cf. 2:21) (Marshall, 86).

Their worship of Jesus and their love for one another combined into a compelling vision of new life, and Jesus added to their number daily those who were being saved.24

The gospel is good news not only of what Jesus did (he died for our sins and was raised, according to the Scriptures) but also of what he offers as a result. He promises to those who respond to him both the forgiveness of sins (to wipe out the past) and the gift of the Spirit (to make us new people). Together these constitute the freedom for which many are searching, freedom from guilt, defilement, judgment and self-centredness, and freedom to be the persons God made and meant us to be (Stott, KL 1330-1333).

what Jesus did was two things together: he added to their number…those who were being saved… He did not add them to the church without saving them (no nominal Christianity at the beginning), nor did he save them without adding them to the church (no solitary Christianity either). Salvation and church membership belonged together; they still do (Stott, KL 1450-1454, italics original).

22 What actually happened may have been that each person held his goods at the disposal of the others whenever the need arose (Marshall, 84).23 It is important to note that even in Jerusalem the sharing of property and possessions was voluntary (Stott, KL 1391).24 That is, their fellowship was expressed not only in caring for each other, but in corporate worship too. Moreover, the definite article in both expressions (literally, ‘the breaking of the bread and the prayers’) suggests a reference to the Lord’s Supper on the one hand (although almost certainly at that early stage as part of a larger meal) and prayer services or meetings (rather than Private prayer) on the other (Stott, KL 1410-1412).

Yet every worship service should be a joyful celebration of the mighty acts of God through Jesus Christ. It is right in public worship to be dignified; it is unforgivable to be dull (Stott, KL 1428-1429).

It is a mistake, therefore, to imagine that in public worship reverence and rejoicing are mutually exclusive. The combination of joy and awe, as of formality and informality, is a healthy balance in worship (Stott, KL 1432-1433).

No, just as their worship was daily (46a), so was their witness. Praise and proclamation were both the natural overflow of hearts full of the Holy Spirit (Stott, KL 1456-1457).

The wind and the fire were abnormal, and probably the languages too; the new life and joy, fellowship and worship, freedom, boldness and power were not (Stott, KL 975-976).