Criswell
Theological Review 5.1 (1990) 43-55.
Copyright © 1990 by The
THE THEOLOGY OF ACTS
DAVID S.
DOCKERY
Broadman Press
The Book of Acts claims to provide a
historical picture of the
early church from its beginnings in
portrait of the life and preaching of the
primitive church in
to Judea,
In
reporting the advancement of the gospel mission, Luke theologized
on the sermons and deeds of Peter, Stephen,
Philip, and Paul. Promi-
nent among the issues in the
study of Acts is the relation of theology
and history. While this critical issue is not our
primary concern, we
cannot ignore the question while discussing Luke's
theology of the
Spirit, Christ and salvation, and the Church and
eschatology.
I. The Critical Questions
F. C. Baur,
from an extreme, one-sided perspective, established a
milestone for the position that the church in the
Book of Acts was not
historical, but the product of a theological
tendency.1 Baur, the leading
figure of the 19th-century
theological intention was to harmonize the apostles
and the primitive
church into the unity of the Una Sancta. He maintained that the history
reflected in Acts and the history in Paul was not
unity, but contrast.
Baur's position was advanced in the beginning of the
20th century by
H.
J. Holtzmann,2 and countered by A.
Schlatter.3
1 The course of research
is traced in W. W. Gasque, A History of the Criticism of
the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1975) and W. G. Kummel, The New
Testament: The History
of the Investigation of Its Problems (London: SCM, 1973); idem,
Introduction to the New
Testament
(London: SCM, 1975) 125-88.
2 H. J. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Theologie (
1911).
3 A. Schlatter, Neutestamentliche Theologie (Stuttgart: Calwer,
1922-1923).
44
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
In the past 40 years the question
has been reopened and vigorously
debated. The Bultmann school extended Baur's thesis
suggesting that
Luke's
Christology was pre-Pauline and his natural theology, escha-
tology, and view of the law
were post-Pauline. Thus, the theology of
Luke
did not represent the primitive church, but an emerging early
catholicism.4 E. Kasemann emphasized
that Luke legitimized his view
of the church in relation to heretical views on
the basis of its continuity
with the early apostolate and its sanctified realm
in the world. He
claimed Luke was the first advocate of an early
catholicism.5
Lukan
scholarship entered a mature phase with the work of H.
Conzelmann, The Theology of St.
Luke (1960). Modifying the research
of Holtzmann, Klein, Bultmann, and Kasemann, Conzelmann advo-
cateda salvation-history
approach outlined around four themes: (1) the
center of time for Luke was the time of Jesus, not the
time of the
church; (2) the theology of Luke must not be compared with
that of
Paul
since it was faced with a problem that was not existent for Paul:
the delay of the parousia and the church's
existence in secular history;
(3)
characteristic for the historical composition through
which Luke
solved this problem was the compartmentalization of
three salvation-
history epochs: (a) the time of
the time of Jesus, the intrinsic time of salvation,
(c) the time of the
church as a time of struggle with doubt and of
patience; and (4) through
this periodization Luke
wanted to make clear to the church of his time
that the forms of the church may change, but the
fundamental structure
should be maintained.6
Throughout, Conzelmann
rejected the historical accuracy of Acts
and viewed Luke's thought as a distortion of
Pauline and Johannine
thought. O. Cullmann
contested Conzelmann's conception of Lukan
salvation history as a distortion of Paul and
John.7 I. H.
building on the work of
addition to his own fresh research, argued that
Luke was a faithful
historian and theologian.10 It
therefore should not be surprising that
4 See J. D. G. Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the New Testament
(
5 E. Kasemann,
Essays on New Testament Themes
(London: SCM, 1960) 88-94.
6 H. Conzelmann,
The Theology of St. Luke (London: Faber,
1960) 14-17.
7 O. Cullmann,
Salvation in History (London: SCM,
1967).
8 W. M. Ramsay, based on
geographical and archaeological studies, argued Luke's
history was amazingly accurate. See Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the
Trustworthiness of the
New Testament
(London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1915).
9 A classical scholar, A. N. Sherwin-White, has concluded that for Acts
the confirma-
tion of historicity is
overwhelming. See Sherwin-White, Roman
Society and Roman Law
in the New Testament (London: Oxford, 1963) 189-00.
10 I. H. Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian (
1970).
David S. Dockery: THE
THEOLOGY OF ACTS 45
many good, critical scholars believe that Luke has
given us a trust-
worthy picture of the life and thought of the early
church. Therefore, it
is possible to understand Acts as a reliable
source for the theology of
the young church.
The most recent approaches to Acts
see the book in light of its
place in the NT canon, apart from historical
considerations.11 Our
approach in this article will merge these
positions. We shall examine the
theology of Acts within its canonical setting,
yet accepting the portraits
of the church as adequate history.12
Yet, whatever merits the work has
for historical investigation, Luke's work is
nevertheless primarily theo-
logical, no matter how much he has put us in his
debt for the historical
information he has conveyed to us. As J. C. Beker has said, "Luke is a
master theologian."13 Luke does not
profess to write a work of the-
ology, but what he writes is
theologically informed and significantly
contributes to our overall understanding of NT
theology.14 With this
understanding let us turn our
attention to Luke's view of the Holy
Spirit, Christ, salvation, the Church, and
eschatology.
II.
The Holy Spirit
The activity of the Spirit in Acts
universalized the mission of
Jesus.15
What the apostles did, in fact whatever was done by
the
church, was seen to be the work of the Spirit.
Initially Luke indicates
that his book was the result of the Spirit's
teaching from the resurrected
11 See M. Parsons,
"Canonical Criticism," in New
Testament Criticism and Inter-
pretation (eds. D. A. Black and
D. S. Dockery; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, forthcoming
1991).
Canonical hermeneutics does not reject the historical issue, it brackets the
question
to deal with other concerns; also see Parsons,
"The Sense of a Beginning in Acts 1-5,"
RevExp 87 (Summer,
1990) 403-22.
12 As G. Ladd has noted,
"This does not require us to believe that the sermons Luke
reports are verbatim accounts; they are
altogether too short for that. Nor do we demur
that Luke is the author of these speeches in their
present form. We may, however, accept
the conclusion that they are brief but accurate
summaries of the earliest preaching of the
apostles. It is also clear that Luke is not a
critical historian in the modern sense of the
word; . . . all real historical writing must involve
selection and interpretation, and Luke
selects from the sources of information
available to him, both written and oral, what to
him are the most important events in tracing the extension
of the church from a small
Jewish
community in
empire." See Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1974)
314;
cf. D. Guthrie, New Testament Theology
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1981)
42-48;
also see D. Dockery, "Acts 6-12: The Advancement of the Christian Mission
Beyond
Hellenist Breakthrough," RevExp 71 (1974)
475-86.
.
13 J.
C. Beker, Paul
the Apostle (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980) 162.
14 L.
Morris, New Testament Theology (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) 144-45.
15 See M. Green, I Believe in the Holy Spirit (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975).
46
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
Lord
to the apostles (Acts 1:2). The apostles were reminded to wait for
the Spirit's coming; thus the Spirit's coming at
Pentecost did not come
to the apostles unprepared.16 The
Spirit is not to be dissociated from
Jesus.
As F. D. Bruner observes, "the Spirit is Jesus at work in continua-
tion of his ministry."17
It is the promise of Christ that the
Spirit will direct the expanding
ministry of the church (Acts 1:8). Luke
prohibited apocalyptic specula-
tion regarding times and
seasons. The attentive look of the apostles
should focus not on the Parousia, but on where and how
the Spirit
would establish them as witnesses. Through the
direction and power of
the Spirit, the gospel would be heard in
The Spirit's special manifestation
at Pentecost was the event which
began the church age. As the giving of the Law at
Sinai served as the
birth of the nation
construction of the church's birth.
Pentecost is best understood as the
reverse of the curse of
act of the ascension (cf. John 7:39; 16:7). It was
accompanied by
unusual physical phenomena: a sound like a
mighty wind and tongues
like fire (Acts 2:2-3). These extraordinary signs
must be regarded as
singular to this initial experience, since they
are not regularly repeated
elsewhere. Although the Spirit would continually
be outpoured, the
outpouring would never again signify the
inauguration of a new era.
The
relationship between fire and Spirit obviously links Pentecost to
John the Baptist's proclamation at Jesus'
baptism (Matt 3:11). It is
noteworthy that the coming of the Spirit was also
associated with the
inauguration of the new age in the
Luke indicates that all the
believers were filled with the Spirit
(Acts
2:4), emphasizing the corporate nature of the Spirit's work. The
little group of believers was sealed by the Spirit.
There is no sugges-
tion that anyone who
believed was either not filled or partially filled.
The filling of the Spirit enabled
them to speak in other (e!teraij)
tongues. What amazed the people was not the
sudden phenomenon of
people speaking in unintelligible tongues, but they
heard Galileans
speaking in their own language (Acts 2:6).
Whether the miracle was one
16 I.
H.
17 F. D. Bruner, A Theology of the Holy Spirit (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970)
156-57.
18 F.
F. Bruce, "The Holy Spirit in the Acts of the Apostles," Int 27 (1973)
172-73.
The
structure of Acts compared with Luke's Gospel also indicates that the birth of
Jesus
(Luke
1:1-2:40) parallels the birth of the church (Acts 1:1-2:47). See R. Longenecker,
"The
Acts of the Apostles," Expositor's
Bible Commentary (12 vols.; ed. F. E. Gaebelein;
David S. Dockery: THE
THEOLOGY OF ACTS 47
of speaking, or hearing, or both, is not clear.
What is clear is that the
Spirit
was active and responsible.
The tongues here are often
identified with ecstatic utterances
similar to those at
Pentecost
were immediately recognized by those who heard them as
current languages, while at
understanding. Therefore, "the
tongues in 2:4 are best understood as
'languages' and should be taken in accord with Philo's
reference to
understandable language as one of the
three signs of God's presence in
the giving of the law at
D. Guthrie suggests that it does not
seem unreasonable to regard
the Pentecost manifestation of tongues as
exceptional. In only two
other places in Acts is speaking in tongues
mentioned, in both cases as
an accompaniment of the outpouring of the Spirit
(Acts 10:46; 19:6).20
In
neither case is there mention made of the hearers being able to
understand, and these occurrences may perhaps be
more similar to the
Corinthian
experience than to Pentecost.21 Yet, all three experiences
described in Acts were for confirmation while the
Corinthian experi-
ences were for edification.
The Spirit's activity at Pentecost
was interpreted as a fulfillment of
Joel's
prophecy which refers to "the last days" and to the inauguration
of "the great and manifest day of the
Lord."22 The pouring out of the
Holy
Spirit was for the apostles an evidence that Jesus had
been
exalted.
The Spirit was given in order to
create in individuals and in the
church a quality of life that would otherwise be
beyond their ability.
Also
the Spirit was given to unite believers into a fellowship that could
not be paralleled in any other group. The Spirit's
coming was not so
much to allow men and women to be comfortable, even
though the
Spirit
is the Comforter (John 16:13), but to make them missionaries and
proclaimers of the good news (Acts
1:8).23
19 Longenecker,
"Acts," 271. A dissenting opinion can be found in R. J. Banks and
Moon,
"Speaking in Tongues: A Survey of the NT Evidence," Churchman 80 (1966)
278-94.
They favor the interpretation that glossolalia
is the ability to speak in a spiritual
language which might be a language of humans or
angels.
20 Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 538-39.
21 Helpful distinctions
are clarified by A. Hoekema, Holy Spirit Baptism (Grand
Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1972) 48-50.
22 R..
N. Longenecker, Biblical
Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (
Eerdmans, 1975) 79; cf. G. Luedemann,
Early Christianity According to the
Tradition in
Acts (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1988).
23 Cf. J. R. W. Stott, The Spirit, the Church, and the World (
InterVarsity, 1990) 29-45.
48
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
The Spirit is present and promised
in the Gospels, but not fully
given until after the events of the Gospels. It is
true that the Gospels
were written after the giving of the Spirit, but
they do not concentrate
on that event. Instead they focus on the Spirit's
equipping Jesus for his
ministry.24 As the Spirit equipped
Jesus for his ministry (Luke 1, 2, 4), so
the Spirit equipped the people of Jesus for
ministry (Acts 1, 2).
The central theme at Pentecost was
not the Spirit; rather it was
Jesus
Christ and the cross event. Luke found the point of the giving of
the Spirit not in the pouring out of the Spirit per
se, but in the universal
promise of salvation for which the Spirit was
poured out.25 The ministry
of the Spirit was Christocentric.
The purpose of the Spirit was to
spread the news of (missiological)
Christ and to exalt the name of
(doxological) Christ.
After Pentecost the Spirit was
active in many aspects of the Chris-
tian community. The Spirit's
power was specifically noticed in preach-
ing, in prophecy, in witness,
in joy, and in the making of decisions. Yet
the primary emphasis of the work of the Spirit in
Luke's second volume
was mission. His theological emphasis demonstrated
that the Spirit
who dwelt in the Messiah of Israel now was
available to the citizens of
than anyone else that the church can live only by
evangelizing and by
following whatever new paths the Spirit indicates.26
The Spirit used various means to
carry out the church's mission.
Primarily
the Spirit employed testimony, story, and the proclaimed
word
(e.g., Acts 2:14, 36; 3:12-26; 5:32; 7:2-53; 8:4; 13:16-41; 18:5;
19:10).
Unpredictably, the Spirit worked through trances (Acts
10:19),
prophets (Acts 11:28), worship services (Acts
13:2), church councils
(Acts
15:28), and inner constraint (Acts 16:6, 7). Through these means
the Spirit universalized and advanced the Christian
mission. Yet, al-
ways the Spirit remained the mysterious, sovereign
Spirit of God. The
apostolic mission energized by the Holy Spirit
proclaimed that salva-
tion was available for Jews
and Gentiles alike as proclaimed in the
apostolic message.
24 This observation is
good evidence for the historical reliability of the gospels.
Many
today want to tell us that the Gospels are only the words of the Church placed
on
the lips of Jesus. In reality, the Gospels are the
words of Jesus placed on the lips of the
Church.
25 Longenecker,
"Acts," 212-14.
26 Cf. Green, I Believe in the Holy Spirit; idem, Evangelism in the Early Church
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1970).
David S. Dockery: THE
THEOLOGY OF ACTS 49
III. Christ and Salvation
What was this apostolic message? The
consistent aspects of this
message have been articulated by C. H. Dodd.
This salvific message
stressed that the age of fulfillment has dawned.
It has taken place
through the ministry, death, and resurrection of
Jesus of Nazareth. By
virtue of the resurrection, Jesus has been raised to
the right hand of
God as messianic head of the Israel of God. The Holy Spirit in the
church is the sign of Christ's present power and
glory. The Messianic
age will shortly reach its culmination in the
return of Christ. The
apostles proclaimed that the hearers needed to
repent, believe in Christ,
receive God's offer of forgiveness and the Holy
Spirit, and be baptized
into the believing community.27
As the message of salvation spread,
a number of misconceptions
attended the birth and growth of the Christian
movement. One con-
cerned the relationship
between the new faith and Judaism since Jesus
was proclaimed as Savior of the world. Peter's
interpretation of Joel at
Pentecost
(Acts 2), Stephen's defense before the Jewish council (Acts
7),
Peter's experience in Joppa with Cornelius (Acts 10), and Paul's
discourse on Mars Hill (Acts 17) all demonstrated
that Christianity was
not merely a Jewish sect, some narrow messianic
movement, but rather
a universal faith.28 Another
difficulty was the popular misidentification
of the Christian faith with the cults and mystery
religions of the day.29
The
encounter with Simon the magician (Acts 8) and the apostles'
refusal to receive worship at Lystra (Acts 14) undermined the charge
that Christianity was another type of superstition.
Instead the Christian
message of salvation rested on Jesus Christ, the
Lord who belonged to
history, who lived in
the dead.
Luke's entire story is built on the
centrality of Jesus' resurrection.
Obvious
is the author's conviction that apart from the resurrection of
Jesus
there was no genuine Christian faith (cf. 1 Cor
15:1-20). God
placed his approval on Jesus' life and work by the
resurrection, verify-
ing the truth claims of the
apostolic message. Thus the replacement
27 Cf. C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments
(
Hodder &
Stoughton, 1936).
28 L. Goppelt,
Theology of the New Testament (trans.
J. Alsup; 2 vols.; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans,
1982) 2:14~16.
29 C. R.
Francisco:
Harper & Row, 1988) 1078-79.
50
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
apostle selected in Acts 1 had to have been a
witness to Jesus' resurrec-
tion. The sermons and
speeches point to the importance of the resur-
rection as the “great reversal”
executed by God (cf. Acts 2:22-24, 36;
3:14-15;
5:30-31; 10:39-42). Likewise, Christ's resurrection served as
the basis for the promise of believers'
resurrection, the foundation of
their hope (cf. Acts 4:2; 13:32-33; 17:18,29-32;
23:6; 24:21; 26:23).30
Certainly it is the resurrection of
Jesus that best explains the
transformation of the shattered
followers of Jesus. These disciples
became people who were convinced that Jesus was alive
and this
message would transform the world. As Guthrie
observes, “their fear-
lessness in proclaiming the
gospel demands an adequate explanation
and no approach to the resurrection is tenable
which does not account
for this transformation."31
Regarding the apostolic understanding of
the reality of the resurrection, W. Pannenberg claims that as long as
historiography does not begin with a
narrow concept of reality which
maintains that dead people do not rise, there is
absolutely no reason
why it should not be possible to speak of the
resurrection of Jesus as the
best explanation of the disciples' experiences of
the appearances and
the discovery of the empty tomb.32
The resurrection and ascension were
events that inaugurated his
lordship over the church and the world. The use
of the title Lord
applied to Jesus was immediate. The employment
of Ku<rioj (Lord)
was equated with deity. Where it is used in Acts,
it often is located in
OT
quotations or allusions, thus implying that the lordship of Christ
carried with it the essence of Godhood. From
Peter's Pentecost sermon
throughout the advancement of the Christian
mission, it was natural for
the Christian church to refer to Jesus in this
exalted way. Further when
Peter
declared Jesus is “Lord of all” (Acts 10:36), he pointed to Jesus'
lordship over both Jews and Gentiles.33
The Christ event, death and
resurrection, was interpreted as part
of the divine purpose (Acts 2:23). Yet, Luke also
recorded Peter's
words that Jesus was killed by the hands of lawless
men. The tension
involved in this juxtaposition is characteristic
of Luke's soteriology.
The
significance of such a claim was to establish that neither the
salvation provided by Jesus nor the salvation
offered to men and
women happened accidentally.
30 M. Tenney, The Reality of the
Resurrection (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963)
49-55.
31 Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 377.
32 W. Pannenberg, Jesus,
God and Man (London: SaM, 1968) 109.
33 E. Haenchen,
The Acts of the Apostles (trans. R. McL.
David S. Dockery: THE
THEOLOGY OF ACTS 51
In line with the divine purpose and
the fulfillment of Scripture
(Acts
3:17-21; 10:42), Luke described Jesus' crosswork by
picturing
Jesus
as servant (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30) as well as Savior (Acts 2:38;
3:19;
5:31; 10:43; 13:23, 38). The servant themes find their background
with the Suffering Servant of Isaiah.34
The meaning of savior is directly
related to the truth that a releasing of sin has
taken place, a forgiveness
has been provided, only in Christ (Acts 4:12).35
The emphasis on forgiveness of sin
was prominent in both of
Luke's volumes. In Acts 2:37, Peter told
the Pentecost audience that
forgiveness of sins and the experience of the
Spirit's presence were
promised to those who repented and were baptized
(also cf. Acts 3:19,
26;
5:31). Luke also associated forgiveness with the response of faith in
Acts
10:43; 13:38, 39; 15:9.36 In Paul's defense before Agrippa, faith
and
repentance were brought together with the
forgiveness of sins.37 For
Luke,
the act of faith and the act of repentance were seemingly
synonymous.
Faith involved turning to Jesus
Christ in trust and commitment,
thus entering into the new life (Acts 16:31). Repentance
also involved a
turning about so that one's life was focused on
a new direction (Acts
5:31).
On the basis of repentance and faith one was baptized and
initiated into the new community, thus
experiencing the reality of
forgiveness of sins.38 For Luke the new
community, the church, was the
sphere in which the forgiving and re-creating presence
of God was
experienced.39
34 Though this
identification is not always recognized. See M. D. Hooker, Jesus
and the Servant (London: SPCK, 1959) 107-16.
35 Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 462, contends
that Luke needs the epistles to
supplement his theology of the work of Christ. F. Stagg, however, in New
Testament
Theology (Nashville: Broadman, 1962) 146-48, constructs a gift and demand model
of the
cross. Also see Stagg, The Book of Acts (Nashville: Broadman, 1955) 28-34.
36 Guthrie,
New Testament Theology, passim.
37 The association of
repentance and faith in Luke's thought is virtually unnoticed
by C. Ryrie and Z. Hodges in the current
"lordship salvation" controversy. This does not
imply that J. MacArthur is
entirely correct, but does note a major gap in the methodology
and content by one side of the discussion.
38 In early Christianity
the baptism event was understood primarily as an act of
initiation into the believing community. The phrase
"be baptized for the forgiveness of
your sins.' (Acts 2:38) does not mean that something
magically happens in the baptismal
waters. Cf. D. J. Williams, Acts (San Francisco: Harper & Row,
1985) 37-42. For a
detailed study of baptism in Acts, see G. R.
Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New
Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962) 93-12.5.
39 The distinctions of
number in the Greek verbs are significant in this connection.
The
call to repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38) is in the singular, but the promise
to
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit is in the
plural, for the Spirit was given to the
52
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
As we have noted the critical event
in the launching of the Chris-
tian community was
undoubtedly Pentecost.40 Acts leaves no doubt
that the new church was essentially a community of
the Holy Spirit.
Immediately
following the Spirit's descent on the community, it grew
significantly in an astonishing manner
(Acts 2:41).
The shape and mission of the church
developed over time. The
Christian
community initially maintained its Jewish roots and associa-
tions. They continued to
worship in the temple (Acts 3:1) and viewed
themselves as representatives of the true Israel.41
The Spirit-led community exemplified
authentic and spontaneous
community (Acts 2:42-41; 4:32). The key element in
this community
was its voluntary nature, so it cannot be seen as a
type of communism.
A
common fund was established from which needs were supplied. The
voluntary pattern of concern developed as the
church grew and ex-
panded (cf. Acts 6:1; 11:21; 1
Cor 16:1; 2 Cor 8-9).42
The picture of the early church
presented in Acts 2:42-41 com-
bined worship, fellowship,
proclamation, and concern for physical and
social needs. These regular meetings took place in the
temple and
appear to have centered around the breaking of bread
(the Lord's
supper) and corporate prayer. The importance of prayer
and its rela-
tion to mission is well
developed in Luke's story (cf. Acts 1:14; 2:42; 3:1;
4:24;
12:12; and 13:3).
The new community empowered by the
Spirit and dependent on
divine resources available through prayer understood
its primary task
to be witness and mission (Acts 1:8). This was
accomplished through
the community's lifestyle, its proclamation, signs
and wonders, and the
specific tasks and speeches of the apostles and
leaders. Those who
responded to the witness were incorporated into
the community
through baptism (2:38-41; 8:12, 36; 16:15; 19:5;
22:16). Believers were
baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Luke wanted
to distinguish
Christian
baptism from John's baptism and therefore emphasized the
community of which the individual became a part.
Cf. L. Morris, Spirit of the Living
God (London: InterVarsity, 1960) 54-57.
40 Marshall, “Significance
of Pentecost,” 350-56; also cf. J. D. G. Dunn, Jesus and
the Spirit (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975) 144-46. i
41 H. Kung, The Church (London: Search, 1968)
115-16, warns against equally
transferring the term
between the two. Also cf. B. Reicke,
"The Constitution of the
Light
of Jewish Documents," Scrolls and
the New Testament (ed. K. Stendahl;
SCM, 1958) 143-56.
42 See K. F. Nickle, The Collection
(London: SCM, 1966).
David S. Dockery: THE THEOLOGY OF ACTS