AUGSBURG COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT Acts 2.42-47

Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament

ACTS

•

Gerhard A. Krodel

Augsburg Publishing House

Minneapolis, Minnesota

p 2 AUGSBURG COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT

Acts

Copyright © 1986 Augsburg Publishing House

All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical articles or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write to: Permissions, Augsburg Publishing House, 426 S. Fifth St., Box 1209, Minneapolis MN 55440.

Scripture quotations unless otherwise noted are from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright 1946, 1952, and 1971 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches.

Material from Acts by Gerhard Krodel, Proclamation Commentaries (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), is used by permission of the publisher.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Krodel, Gerhard, 1926–

Acts.

(Augsburg commentary on the New Testament)

Bibliography: p.

1. Bible. N.T. Acts—Commentaries. I. Title.

II. Series.

BS2625.3.K75 1986 226’.607 86-10796

ISBN 0-8066-8884-X

Summary Statement: The Life of the Pentecost Community (2:42–47)

After his dramatic narrative of Pentecost Luke changes his pace and inserts the first of three summary statements (cf. 4:32–35; 5:11–16) in which he depicts the church as an alternative community within and distinct from Jewish society.

These summaries also distinguish and connect individual scenes (in this case, the Pentecost narrative and the healing of the lame man), and they create the impression that a longer period of time elapses between individual scenes. They summarize and generalize what in Luke’s opinion was important in the life of the community at its beginning. For instance, Luke knew that individual Christians, like Barnabas, voluntarily had sold part of their property and contributed the proceeds of the sale to the community (4:36–37). In his summary statement Luke generalized this by writing that all sold their possessions and goods for the community’s benefits (2:44–45).

This summary has an a b a b structure: (a) the life of the community (v. 42), (b) the effect on outsiders (v. 43), (a) the life of the community (vv. 44–47a), (b) the effect on outsiders (v. 47b–c). The messianically restored, Spirit–endowed Israel is itself a witness by its very life. Luke intended this message to be heard also by the church of his day.

42—Four basic characteristics must be present in the church of every age. And they devoted themselvesmarks the perennial issue of every Christian community. Will it remain faithful to its Lord and persevere, or was it merely a fly-by-night enthusiasm that disintegrated when the harsh winds of history began to blow? The Pentecost community of Jerusalem remained grounded in the apostles’ teaching. This first item includes not only the traditions of “the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word” (Luke 1:2), found in Luke’s Gospel, but also the apostolic teaching including the Christological interpretation of the Old Testament found in Acts. Fellowship (Greek, koinōnia) appears in Luke-Acts only in this verse. It means that all who believed were together (v. 44). No splits and no schisms! If difficulties arise they must be resolved in a spirit of unanimity (cf. 6:1–6; 15:1–35). The oneness of the church witnesses to the one Lord p 93 who saves and to the one Holy Spirit who created and sustains the church. Moreover fellowship, koinōnia, has a social dimension. It means that all had all things in common (v. 44; Greek, koina). There is no koinōnia without sharing of material goods! The breaking of bread in Judaism meant the act, connected with a table blessing, with which the father of the household opened a meal (cf. Mark 6:41). At Luke’s time it had become the designation of the Lord’s Supper (20:7; cf. 1 Cor. 10:16). Originally the Lord’s Supper was celebrated in conjunction with a regular meal, in which the breaking of the bread together with the words of interpretation concerning the bread opened the meal and “the cup of blessing” followed at the end of the meal (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:25). At the next stage the Lord’s Supper was celebrated at the conclusion of a regular meal. Breaking bread in their homes (v. 46b) refers to the celebration of the Eucharist, while they partook of food refers to regular meals (v. 46c). Daily celebrations of the Eucharist cannot be deduced from v. 46because the Greek phrase day by day (Greek, kath’ hēmeran) refers only to the first clause, namely, that they attended the temple daily, and has its correspondence in the phrase in their homes (Greek, kat’ oikon) where they celebrated the Eucharist. The Eucharist was probably celebrated on Sundays (cf. 20:7). But every meal was an occasion of joyful remembrance of the meals with Jesus before and after Easter. Instead of generous hearts (v. 46) we should translate “simplicity of heart.” Simplicity is not simplemindedness, nor stupidity, but the opposite of duplicity and doubt. The church must keep its priorities straight. In prayers the church responds to God’s mighty acts by praising him (v. 47a) and Jesus. The early Christians made use of the prayers of the Psalms. But the experience of the Spirit produced new expressions—Abba! Father! (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6)—even as the Lord’s prayer gave new encouragement to prayer (Luke 11:2–4, 5–13). Prayer addressed to Jesus (cf. 7:59–60) probably grew out of the acclamation “Maranatha” (1 Cor. 16:22).

43–47—The presence of the Spirit-filled alternative community cannot remain unnoticed. Its effects upon outsiders is on the one hand a kind of uneasiness or fear which is intensified because many signs and wonders are done by the apostles. Later on Luke will narrate four specific miracles by Peter (3–11; 5:1–11; 9:32–42). On the other hand, the Pentecost community finds favor with all the people (v. 47a; cf. Luke 2:52). There is as yet no opposition from p 94 the people or their leaders, and therefore the church grows, which ultimately is the work of God (v. 47c). Even though the community developed new liturgical forms in the breaking of bread and in prayers (vv. 42 and 46), nevertheless it did not neglect worship in the temple.For the temple is the center of Israel’s life and the place where the true Israel expresses its continuity with the past and its solidarity with the Israel that has not yet repented. In short: the Holy Spirit is manifested in the Pentecost community through miracles, bold preaching, and perseverance in the apostles’ teaching, through the celebration of the Eucharist, through prayer and worship in the temple, and through growth of the people of God. Last but not least, a new social solidarity among its members manifests the presence of the Spirit of God.

The community of goods has fascinated the readers of Acts. But Luke’s two summary statements (2:44–45; 4:32, 34–35) have also raised questions. For instance, if all believers had sold their houses (cf. 4:34) how could they have met in their homes (cf. 2:46; 12:12)? If no one called anything his or her own, then how could anyone give alms? Peter declared, “I have no silver,” yet he was in charge of the community’s funds together with the other apostles (cf. 3:6; 4:35). The two summary statements speak of a general practice while 5:1–11 speaks of a voluntary practice. Finally, nowhere else in Acts is a community of goods mentioned apart from the first two summary statements, and Paul’s exhortation of “helping the weak” presupposes private property (20:33–35). These tensions suggest that Luke presented us with an idealized picture of the Jerusalem community’s sharing of goods. If so, one should not speak of an early Christian communism, because historically it never existed. Voluntary sharing of possessions, as practiced by Barnabas, cannot be equated with communism. But then the question arises, What was Luke’s purpose in painting this picture of a total sharing of all material goods? First, this picture reminds us of Jesus’ identification with the poor (cf. Luke 1:51–53; 4:18–19; 6:20) and of his radical demands on his disciples (cf. 12:32–34; 14:33; 18:22). Therefore, Luke’s picture of the community of goods illustrates the continuity between Jesus and the origins of the church. Second, Luke underscores that the church’s spirituality is inseparable from social responsibility. The Spirit-filled community takes care of the material needs of its members. The presence of the Spirit liberates from preoccupation with p 95 material things and prompts the church and its members to share material possessions. What we do or do not do with our material possessions is an indicator of the Spirit’s presence or absence. With this idealized picture, Luke challenged the church of his day to take responsibility for the needy (cf. 6:1–6; 11:29; 20:35; 24:17; Luke 19:8). The Holy Spirit liberates from the bourgeois quest for material security (cf. Luke 12:16–21) and he liberates for a community that expresses the Greek ideal of friendship, in which friends have all things in common (cf. Plato, Republic4.424a), as well as the Hebrew hope for a community free from poverty (Deut. 15:4–5). Luke’s picture of the community of goods is a criticism of the indifference of all well-to-do Christians toward their needy brothers and sisters and it is a call to find creative ways to overcome the gulf between the rich and poor in the church, which is the eschatological alternative to the communities of the world, including unrepentant Israel.

Krodel, G. A. (1986). Acts. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House.

Exportado de Software Bíblico Logos, 08:27 17 de janeiro de 2018.