Acts 1

Acts 1:1-26

The Acts of the Apostles Chapter 1:1-26 Acts 1:1-5 THE book which we call the Acts of the Apostles may be said to complete the Pentateuch of New Testament history. Four of these books present the Person of our Lord; while the fifth gives the first page of the history of the Church; that is, the story of the first activities of Christ, in power, in the history of the race.

The story of these first things in the life of the Church has a fascination from which there is no escape. However it may be read, it interests. But to see its true character, before beginning to deal with it in detail, we need to recognize the nature of the book as a whole, and its place in the New Testament revelation.

The book opens with a reference to one of the earlier books, in the words,-“The former treatise.” The Lucan authorship of the Acts of the Apostles needs no argument. We take that as fully established, both by the long-continued opinion of the Church, and by the conclusions of the most recent scholarship. Consequently we may take it for granted that this reference, at the commencement of the book, is to the Gospel which bears Luke’s name.

In order that the value of this may be gained, we will read the prologue to Luke’s Gospel:

“Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed.”

We then take up the book of the Acts of the Apostles and read, “The former treatise I made, O Theophilus.” The continuity is apparent on the surface. We have the same writer, Luke; the same reader, Theophilus; the same subject, Jesus.

Yet perhaps the whole of that does not appear immediately. One is inclined to say; the writer is the same; the reader is the same; but is the subject the same?

First let us recognize that the title of the book is an unfortunate one. To one taking up the book for the first time, that title, “The Acts of the Apostles,” would seem to suggest that in the book we should find a chronicle of all the doings of all the apostles. We know that this is not so. As a matter of fact the Greek title of the manuscript is “Acts of Apostles.” That is more indefinite, suggesting only that it records some acts of some apostles, which comes far nearer the truth. Some of the apostles are never named beyond their inclusion in the list given before the account of the Pentecostal effusion. Further, not all the acts of any one apostle are recorded.

The book as history is merely a fragment, and in some senses a disappointing fragment; but the incompleteness of the story is part of the method of the Spirit. When we come to its last sentences, we inevitably put it down, feeling that there are a hundred questions we want to ask. The last picture we have in the book is that of Paul in his own hired house in Rome, receiving all that came to him; teaching them the things concerning Jesus; and preaching to them the Kingdom of God. Before he went to Rome he wrote to the Romans that he hoped to go on by them unto Spain, for his eyes were ever fixed on regions beyond. We should like to know if he ever did pass on to Spain; yes, and more, whether the feet of the intrepid apostle ever actually stood on the soil of Britain. These things the book does not tell us.

It is an unfinished fragment.

Nevertheless in the imperfect nature of the book there is a perfect system. It is the story of the first movements of the Christian fact in the world; revealing principles, indicating methods, showing failure; and all in order that there might be at least one page of inspired Church history, which, men reading, might know the true meaning and mission of the Church in the history of the world.

But this fact that the book is the first page of Church history is not a final or perfect definition of its value. To discover what its supreme value is, we must come back once more to the initial phrase, in which we shall find the key which unlocks the book:-“The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began both to do and to teach.” Observe carefully that word began. If the writer had written: “All that Jesus did and taught,” the suggestion would have been entirely different. That would have suggested a conception of the mission of the Lord in the world, which was not that of the writer of this treatise; it would also have suggested a conception of the purpose of this treatise, which was not that of its writer.

The words, “ the former treatise," as we have seen, take us back to the Gospel so full of exquisite beauty in its artistic setting forth of the matchless glory of the Person of Jesus Christ; the Gospel which pays little attention to chronology, but groups events so as to present the perfect Man, perfected through processes, and perfecting others by the mystery of His work. With that Gospel in our minds, we take up the new treatise by the same writer, and find that it is linked to this Gospel.

What then is the Gospel of Luke? It is the story of the birth and being; of the childhood and confirmation; of the attesting and anointing of Jesus. It gives the account of the processes of teaching, and temptation, and transfiguration through which He passed. It records His descent to the valley; His going to the Cross; His resurrection; and His ascension. This surely is the story of all Jesus did and taught. No; according to Luke: it is the story of all He began to do and to teach.

The same writer now commences a second treatise, and the inference of this method of introduction is, that he is about to write the story of the continuity of the doings and teachings of the same Person.

When we gather in worship to-day, we do not do so in memory of a dead leader; but in the real presence of a living Lord. We do not merely think of One Who did and taught, in the dim distance of times of which we know very little. We are not following One of Whom we have read in the records. That is not the truth concerning Christianity. We gather about the living Christ, Whose touch has still its ancient power; the thrill of communion with Whom by the Spirit is the flame that inspires us to new endeavour; the inspiration of Whose love within our heart, draws us to sacrificial service for men. The former treatise was concerning all that Jesus began to do and to teach; and the new treatise is concerning the things He continues to do and to teach.

It is not final. It is concerned with the things that Christ is still doing and teaching; and in the Apocalypse, the last Unveiling, we come to dreams and revelations, to signs and symbols and mysteries revealing the things He is yet to do.

We have seen the Christ in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; as King and Servant; as Man and God; the face of the lion, and of the ox, of the man, and of the eagle; to borrow the ancient mystic symbolism of the East.

We see Him in the Acts proceeding to kingly empire by the royal race of men and women, who look upon their girding as His bond-slaves as being a greater honour than any crowns that can be placed upon their brows. We see Him in the Acts proceeding through processes, toward the making of men and women conformed to the image of His manhood, and made partakers of the Divine nature.

But the story is not completed. The last picture is that of an Apostle in prison, while others have been slain, and others persecuted. The victory is not won; and we thank God therefore for the fact that there is another book; and in it the story of a great Throne, and in the midst of the Throne a Lamb as it had been slain, and round about the Throne four living creatures with the faces of the lion, and the ox, and the man, and the eagle; which story foretells His ultimate victory.

When we come to the study of this book, therefore, we must understand that it is not a merely mechanical story of the journeyings of Paul, or of the doings of Peter. It is intended to reveal to us the processes through which Christ proceeds in new power, consequent upon the things He began to do and teach, toward the ultimate and final victory, which we see symbolized in the mystic language of Revelation.

There is a soliloquy of Jesus contained in the Gospel of Luke, and in no other (Luke 12:49-50). In the midst of our Lord’s teaching of the crowd He seems suddenly to have paused, and in these two verses we have what must be described as a soliloquy.

“ I came to cast fire upon the earth; and what do I desire if it is already kindled? But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished." Mark the strange word here, the arresting word, “ How am I straitened till it be accomplished." This is Christ’s own word; it is something He said of Himself, in the midst of His strenuous life and ministry; I am constrained; I am imprisoned; I cannot yet do My mightiest work. What was His mightiest work? “I came to cast fire upon the earth.” So His herald had declared. John’s voice had rung out over the mountains and plains, saying: “ I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance, but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, Whose shoes I am not worthy to bear : He shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire." Christ uttered the same thought when He said, “ I came to cast fire." That was the purpose of His coming, but He said: I cannot cast it yet; I am straitened; I have a baptism to be baptized with; and I cannot realize the fulfillment of My mission save by the way of that baptism-the baptism of My Passion and My Cross. That is the whole story of the Gospel.

We come now to the Acts of the Apostles, and we find the same Christ, but no longer straitened. The baptism is accomplished, the whelming is over. He has passed into the infinite morning, and the larger life, and He is about to scatter the fire. He could not cast that fire until His passion was accomplished. On that side of the Cross He was straitened; but on this side He is no longer straitened.

Let us try and express this in the terms of the experience of the disciples.

Jesus said to His disciples, “ It is expedient"-and reverently let us change His word for the moment-“It is better for you that I go away; " better that My hands should not rest upon your head again, John; better that you should not be able to lay your head upon this bosom of Mine, and feel the beating of My heart; for if I go not away, the Comforter, the Paraclete, will not come.

The better thing, then, is the presence of the Christ, by the Spirit, in the heart and life of the disciples. Supposing, for the sake of argument, that He had stayed in the world, living an eternal life on the human level merely, and in physical presence. How we should have been straitened! If He were in Judaea He could not be in England. If He were in London, and had gathered with His people in one place, He could not be in another. But now, in the great cathedral; in the church; in the chapel; in the Salvation Army citadel; in the cottage; with the two or three gathered together, everywhere is the Christ.

He came again and was not straitened, was not limited. The geographical limitations were ended, and the spiritual presence began. Paul, that man who saw so clearly into the heart of the Christian fact, wrote-and we now begin to understand the meaning of his exulting writing-“Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the flesh; even though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now we know Him so no more.” In this book of the Acts then, we see Christ with all human sympathy, and Divine power, everywhere present by the Spirit, beginning to live and work, not in Judaea only, but also in Samaria, and to the uttermost part of the earth. He is seen, being completed in His Body, the Church; and His Church is seen, becoming the instrument through which the Spirit of His life moves forward in salvation, and to empire.

We might, therefore, call this book which we are studying, not the Acts of the Apostles, but “ The book of the continued doing and teaching of the living Christ by the Holy Spirit through His Body which is the Church.”

The study of the Acts of the Apostles will have a two-fold effect upon us;-it will fill us with hope; it will fill us with shame. We shall see in it, how the Body of the Christ was indeed the instrument of His victory. Yet we shall see Him straitened in the imperfection of the Body which is His Church.

Before this risen glorified One passed out of human sight, to return in spiritual power at Pentecost, He stood in the midst of a group of disciples, and He said to them : Ye shall be My witnesses;-My evidences, My credentials, My arguments;-in Jerusalem, in Judaea, in Samaria, and to the uttermost part of the earth.

Yet now, nearly two thousand years after we have not reached the uttermost part of the earth. We need cast no reflection on past centuries; but if we catch the vision of this Christ, and feel the tenderness of His yearning heart, and are brought by the study of this book under the compulsion of His great demand, before the generation passes, the whole earth will have heard the witness.

There is failure all through this book, but there is yet gracious victory here also. As we read it, we shall find a revelation of purpose and power; and we shall find the indication of the perils that confront us as the members of His Body.

Acts 1:6-26 This paragraph serves as a link between the things of the “ former treatise of Luke," and those of his new story. Here we have our last glimpse of the disciples before Pentecost; and our last vision of Jesus-to use Paul’s descriptive phrase, “ after the flesh"-present among His disciples in bodily form. Surely the artistic hand of Luke is evident in the placing of this paragraph here.

Here we see the Lord, and the apostles; and yet a larger group, consisting of “the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and His brethren “; gathered together. As we look at this group we recognize that the picture is intimately related to all that we have seen in the Gospel story. This is the same Jesus, Whose birth was there recorded, Whose ministry was chronicled, Whose crucifixion was described, Whose resurrection was declared, and Who was finally revealed as One ascended to God. He is spoken of as “ Jesus,” as the “ Lord Jesus.” It is the old word, the old title; the name by which He had been called in the days of His life at Nazareth, the title by which His disciples had addressed Him in the days of His public ministry. The Person is very familiar; coming from the olden days. This is equally true of the men and women round about Him. We seem to know them all.

All this is to emphasize the statement, that this paragraph constitutes a page between the preface and the main story of the book. Moreover we shall never again meet Christ through all the story as we meet Him here. We shall never in this book see Him again in the same visible and material relationship to these men. He will be absent. No more the walk between Jerusalem and Jericho. No more the laying of the hand upon the children brought to Him. No more the actual looking of the human eye, into the eye of some decrepit soul needing help. No more the human tone of the voice in answer to which disease flees. We shall never meet Him thus again. Henceforth know we not Christ “ after the flesh."

But we shall see these men again; and yet, all the way through the book, they will be changed, and different; not in the visible externals; but absolutely changed in the hidden facts of the life. A new light will shine through the same eyes. A new tone will come into the same voices. A new atmosphere will be generated by the same presences. Peter will be the same man, and yet absolutely changed. All the old impulsiveness will be present, and all the enthusiasm and the fire and the fervour that made him fit companion of the sons of thunder, Boanerges. But there will be something else. The change will not be that which denies the natural, but the change that baptizes it with the supernatural, until it becomes its fitting and magnificent instrument.

The picture of Jesus and His disciples given to us in this paragraph, serves to reveal, first, the results of the things He began to do and to teach; and, secondly, the need for that coming of the Paraclete, which was immediately to follow. As we look at the picture we are first amazed at the wonderful results of the things Jesus began to do and to teach, as manifested in these men; but we are supremely impressed with the truth of what the Lord Himself said to them in the paschal discourses just preceding His Cross, “ It is expedient for you that I go away."

We will divide our present study into two parts; dealing first, with the last glimpse of the disciples before Pentecost; and secondly, with the last vision of Jesus after the flesh.

I. In considering the last glimpse of the disciples before Pentecost, let us carefully notice the two things already indicated; first, the wonderful results of the things He began to do and to teach; and secondly, the necessity revealed for the coming of the Paraclete.

We begin then with the results of the things Jesus began to do and to teach.

We have first, the story of their gathering about Him, of His final commission, and of His departure. Then we have the story of their going back, after His departure, to Jerusalem; of their being of one accord in one place, steadfastly given to prayer. Finally we have the story of Peter’s address concerning the vacancy in the apostolate created by the death of Judas, and of how they proceeded to fill the vacancy by the election of Matthias.

In the first of these things their wonderful confidence in Him is revealed; their confidence in each other is revealed in the second; and their .confidence in the Scriptures of truth is revealed in the third. All these were the direct result of their having been the disciples of Jesus during the three years of His public ministry. They were the issue of the things He had said to them in many a patient discourse by the way, and in many a long and lonely walk; of the things He had wrought miraculously among the sons of men; of the mystery of the Cross and of the wonder of the Resurrection.

We are impressed supremely with their confidence in Him. They asked Him: “ Lord, dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel ? " Let us forget for a moment the mistake they made; forget the narrowness of their outlook; and mark their quiet confidence in Him, as revealed in their assumptions.

They assumed His Lordship, addressing Him as Lord. They assumed His ability to bring the ancient economy and purpose of God to a final consummation. They were Hebrews. They had grown up in the great hope of the Hebrew people. For long years, perchance through all the early years of their lives, it had been a very faint hope; but as they had walked with Him, and talked with Him along the way-and especially in those final discourses after resurrection, when, as Luke has told us, He opened to them the Scriptures, and gave them to understand the meaning of their own nationality and economy-they had come to see the larger vision; the kingdom restored to Israel; God’s ancient purpose fulfilled. They believed He was able to do this.

But a little while ago they had questioned His ability, when at Caesarea Philippi they said in effect : That be far from Thee, Lord; if Thou dost take Thy way to the Cross, Thou wilt be defeated; and disaster will overtake Thee rather than victory! Two of them on the way to Emmaus had said, “ We hoped that it was He Who should redeem Israel." “We hoped”-the past tense; for hope had been extinguished, and their confidence had failed.

But now all this was changed, and here they stood about Him, having perfect confidence in His ability to fulfill their highest and truest hope-the restoration of the kingdom to Israel; to establish the will of God, to consummate the purposes of the Most High.

We are next impressed by their confidence in each other. When they were come together into the one place, Luke tells us, they were of one mind. Notice the grouping of the apostles here. It would be unsafe to build a doctrine upon this, or to overemphasize its value, but it is interesting to see that the moment we get into the Acts of the Apostles, the grouping of these men is changed.

Peter and John. That is new. It always used to be Peter and James and John. Now, “ Peter and John and James and Andrew “; that is the first group. There were only three in the olden days, and we speak of them as the men of special privilege, taken to special places of vision. Perhaps, after all, Peter, James, and John needed more especial care because of the weakness of their boanergic temperament. When Luke groups them in the Acts he brings Andrew in, the man who never seems to have occupied a place of privilege, of whom we know nothing at all, save that he called Peter. Now Luke puts him in with the first three, and thus associates the ordinary and outside man with those more notable.

Then again, Peter and John were never agreed in the Gospel story. They never understood each other. Peter was the practical man, John was the poet. Peter was, always doing, John was always dreaming. When you get to the last chapter of John, John is still troubling Peter, so that he says to the Lord: “ Lord, and what shall this man do?” In the new grouping, they have gone into partnership; the doer and the dreamer; the practical man and the poet. Then James and Andrew, the courteous and the curious.

Next Philip and Thomas. Philip the reserved man, who believed everything, and was willing to be on the edge of the crowd and bring strangers to Jesus. Thomas, the skeptic, who demanded proof, or he would believe nothing. Then Bartholomew and Matthew; Nathanael, the guileless worshipper; and Matthew the publican, the astute tax-gatherer. Then three, “ James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the son of James." No one knows anything about the first two, and Judas is only known as one who asked a question in the upper room (John 14:22).

Is not all this at least suggestive? Does it not seem to say to us that the Cross and the Resurrection brought men into an affinity that cancelled all merely temperamental discords?

“ And certain women, and Mary the mother of Jesus." That is the last glimpse of the highly favoured Virgin Mother. “And His brethren.” They were never with Him in the days of His flesh, but they are gathered now in the one accord. Confidence in each other is the basis of a new fellowship.

And once again, observe their confidence in the Scriptures. Peter now commenced to interpret the present by the Scriptures of the past. He made quotation from two of the great Psalms (79 and 109) and distinctly, and without any hesitation, said that David wrote these things by the Holy Spirit concerning Judas. If we read Psalms 79 or 109, without the illumination of this interpretation, we should never dream that there was a reference in them to Judas, or that there was a reference in them to the Messiah. The great Messianic psalms are indeed Messianic psalms; but the writers did not understand the full richness of their Messianic values. David was referring to one of his own enemies; but Peter deliberately and quietly quotes the old and familiar passage, and says that finally it had reference to Judas and to Jesus.

One of the last things that Luke tells us in his Gospel story is of how Jesus walked and talked with the disciples, and opened to them all the Scriptures, beginning from Moses; of how He spoke to this selfsame group just before leaving them, and taught them that it behooved Him to suffer, that all things written in the Scriptures should be fulfilled; naming the three great divisions, Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms. Peter was a Hebrew brought up on the very Scriptures which he was quoting, familiar with their letter, undoubtedly; but now he read them with a new understanding. He had seen a new light in them.

Thus we see gathered about Jesus a group of men with perfect confidence in their Lord; with joyful confidence in each other; with an absolute confidence in the value of the Scriptures of the Old Testament. These things all resulted from the things He began to do and to teach.

But now let us briefly notice the incompleteness manifested, which necessitated the coming of the Paraclete.

The first fact observable is that of their ignorance of Christ’s purpose. “ Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" Christ rebuked, not their conception that the kingdom is to be restored to Israel for-that He never rebuked-but their desire to know when it would take place. “ It is not for you to know times or seasons, which the Father hath set within His own authority." A popular interpretation of this is that Christ said to them: “ There is to be no restoration of the kingdom to Israel." Christ did not say so. What He did say was: It is not for you to know the times or seasons. You have other work to do. “ Ye shall receive power when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be My witnesses."

These men did not understand that. They loved Him, they were loyal to Him, they loved each other, they loved their own Scriptures, they had come to a new appreciation of them; but they were not ready for their work, because they had not seen what it would be. They had no conception of this new spiritual mission to which they were called. They did not understand the method by which God was about to work toward the ultimate consummation. They had heard Him, had seen Him, had come to love Him, and believe in Him; but they were absolutely ignorant of the next step in the programme of God; and they never did understand it until Pentecost, and the consequent interpretation by the Spirit of all the things that Jesus had said.

In the next place notice their consequent inability to execute His commission. He had said to them that they were to be witnesses. But here they were in the upper room; of one accord; steadfast in prayer; happy in their mutual comradeships; constant in their loyalty; but quite unable to witness. They could do nothing to bear testimony to Him until after Pentecost.

And again-this is a debated point in interpretation-but my own conviction is that we have a revelation of their inefficiency for organization; that the election of Matthias was wrong. Their idea of what was necessary as a witness to the resurrection was wrong. They said that a witness must have been with them from the baptism of John. They thought a witness must be one who had seen Jesus prior to His ascension. As a matter of fact the most powerful incentive to witness was the seeing of Christ after resurrection, as when He arrested Saul of Tarsus on his way to Damascus. So their principle of selection was wrong.

Their method of selection was also wrong. The method of casting lots was no longer necessary. Thus we have the wrong appointment of Matthias. He was a good man, but the wrong man for this position, and he passed out of sight; and when presently we come to the final glory of the city of God, we see twelve foundation stones, and twelve apostles’ names, and I am not prepared to omit Paul from the twelve, believing that he was God’s man for the filling of the gap.

These men were perfectly sincere, proceeding on the lines of revealed truth, but they were ignorant of God’s next method; unable to bear their witness; unable to organize themselves for the doing of the work; and consequently needing the coming of the Paraclete.

II. In conclusion, let us look at this last vision of Jesus “ after the flesh." His last teaching was a correction; a promise; and a commission. He corrected them. He did not deny their hope that the kingdom should be restored to Israel. He only rebuked their curiosity, and in that last word He taught His disciples and His Church that they have nothing to do with the times and the seasons of Israel; nothing to do with dates and days and calendars and predictions. What, then, are they to do?

First they are to recognize that for the doing of that to which He calls them, they need power: “ Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you." Then follows the commission. He gathered the whole earth into His declaration of purpose. Beginning in Jerusalem, passing out through Judaea and Samaria, and at last reaching the uttermost part of the earth, they were to be witnesses.

The last doing of Jesus after the flesh was that of vanishing. The last act was that of disappearing. As they looked upon Him, He was received up, and so He vanished out of their sight. He did not go away; He went out of sight as to bodily presence. We are perfectly correct in using the word up-He was received up-that is, on to the higher level of life; the life that is higher than the merely material, and manifest, and localized, and limited. The man Jesus vanished from sight, but the Christ did not depart. He had said, “ Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the age."

The body in which He began to do and to teach passed out of their sight. It did not cease to be, but for their sakes it vanished to make way for the body in which He would continue to do and to teach, which is His Church, “ the fullness of Him that filleth all in all." The days of limited service were over, the days of unlimited service were about to begin. The body of earthly service passed out of sight, and the new body was there, not having come to birth and might, but waiting for the Pentecostal effusion.

The Man of Nazareth is still a man in God’s universe. The terms up or down, far or near, we shall have to cancel when presently we drop this robe of flesh, and pass into the light and into the glory; but the Man of Nazareth will forever be the central point of manifestation, as He was in the world. The Christ of God, the Son of God, the Saviour, Who wrought out into visibility, through His body, the infinite facts of the Divine Being and of human redemption, was still near to His disciples, but they must be trained to faith, and not to sight. Therefore He vanished. The last vision is that of the vanishing, but not that of departing, not of going away.

One other word. We see these men looking, gazing toward heaven. The cloud had enwrapped Him, and He had gone, and yet they were gazing. Then there stood by them two men. We nearly always say angels, but the Bible says “ Men." Perhaps they were Moses and Elijah, the men who appeared on the mount of transfiguration. Two men stood by them. They had lost one Man, the One was gone, but two were there. These two said, “ Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? This Jesus shall so come in like manner.” The form that you have loved to look upon will yet be seen of your eyes. For to-day, He is out of sight; but He is not away from you.

He had passed out of sight, but He knew how their hearts would break; He knew how difficult it would be to realize Him when He was gone; and so He sent them a message out of the unseen. Two other men bore that message. What a startling thing it was! One Man had gone, but there were two. So they knew that the One was not lost. In a moment the two were also gone! What had the disciples learned? That they knew nothing about that which was around them, save that at any moment the One might appear again.

We do not understand it, but the fragrance of it is all about us, and whereas we worship the mystic, and the eternal, and the unseen Christ, we still work in comradeship with the Man of Nazareth.

“ Warm, sweet, tender, even yet A present help is He; And faith has still its Olivet, And love its Galilee."