Beferencb.
Place.
General Dkscriptios.
Chief Actors.
1111.
Jerusalem.
The Ascension and promise of the Spirit.
Jesus and the Twelve.
112-28.
"
Choice of Matthias. Speech of Peter.
Peter and the Twelve.
21-47.
"
Gift of the Spirit. Glossolalia. Speech of Peter.
Peter and the Twelve.
31-28.
ti
Healing miracle by Peter and John.
Speech of Peter.
Peter [and John].
41-22
>•
Imprisonment of Peter and John. Speech of Peter.
Peter [and John].
422-31.
"
Their release. Meeting of the Church. Gift of the Spirit.
Peter [and John].
482-518.
"
Communism in the Church.
Peter, Barnabas [Ana- nias, Sapphira] .
617-42.
••
Imprisonment of Peter and John.
Speech of Gamaliel.
Peter [and John].
61-7.
It
Appointment of the Seven.
The apostles.
68-16.
Preaching of Stephen. His arrest.
Stephen.
7I-S8.
"
Speech of Stephen. His death.
Stephen.
84-25.
Samaria.
Philip's preaching.
Philip, Peter [and John].
Simon llagus.
Simon Magus.
828-40.
The road to Gaza.
Philip's conversion of the Ethiopian.
Philip.
91-31.
The road to Damascus.
Conversion of Saul, and extension of the Church.
Paul.
932.1048.
Lydda, Joppa, Ossarea.
Peter's journey through Lydda, Joppa,
Caesarea. Conversion of Cornelius.
Peter.
Speech of Peter.
111-18.
Jerusalem.
Peter's speech on Cornelius' conversion.
Peter.
1119-28.
Antioch.
Foundation of Gentile Christianity.
Hellenistic Jews, Barna- bas, Paul.
1127-80.
Collection for Jerusalem.
Barnabas, Paul.
121-24.
Jerusalem.
Herod's persecution. Peter's imprisonment. Death of Herod.
Peter.
1225.
Return of Barnabas and Saul to Antioch.
Barnabas, PauL
131-1428.
Journey.
First missionary journey.
Paul.
151-35.
Jerusalem.
Apostolic Council.
Peter, James, Paul.
1536-1822.
Journey.
Second missionary journey.
Paul.
1823-2116.
„
Third missionar.v journej'.
Paul.
2117-2311.
Jerusalem*
Paul's deal ings with James. His arrest. Speech to Sanhedrin.
PauL
2312-2632.
Caesarea.
Paul's imprisonment in Csesarea. Felix. Festus. Agrippa.
Paul.
271-2816.
Journey.
Journey to Rome.
PauL
2817-31.
Rome.
Paul and Jews in Rome.
Paul.
to preach to Gentiles without insisting on the Jewish Law, and how this had been perceived to be the work of the Spirit by the Jewish apostles who recognized the revelation to this efiect to St. Paul and to St. Peter (Ac Q'^*^- 2221 ^ib i5iff.)_
3. The sources used in Acts. — The most super- ficial examination of Acts shows that it is divided most obviously into a ' Peter ' part and a ' Paul ' part ; it is, therefore, not strange that the critics of the beginning of the 19th cent, thought of dividing Acts into narratives derived from a hypothetical ' Acts of Peter ' and a hypothetical 'Acts of Paul.' But further investigation has gone behind this division : it has been seen that important questions are involved in the relation of the ' we-clauses ' to the rest of the narrative relating to St. Paul, the story of the Antiochene
1223-81 Qj. even more. There is nothing in these sections which cannot have come from St. Paul or his entourage, and the inaccuracies in the narrative, as compared with the Epistles, do not seem to point to any greater fallibility on the part of the writer than that to be found in other historical writers who are in the possession of good sources. At the same time, this does not mean tliat the assignment of these chapters to a ' Paul ' source is final or exclusive of others. Some sections within these limits (e.g. Ac 15) may come from some other Jerusalem or Antiochene source, and some sections outside them (e.g. the story of Stephen's death) may have come from the 'Paul' source.
If, on the other hand, it should ultimatel.'y appear that the evidence from style has been
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
23
exaggerated or misrepresented, it will be necessary to regard the ' we-sections ' as representing a separate source, and consider the question whether the rest of the chapters mentioned above came from one or several sources. At present, however, no one has shown any serious ground for thinking that we can distinguish any signs of change of style, or of doublets in the narrative, to point in this direction.
(2) The problems presented by the earlier chapters are much more complicated. The chief
Eoint which attracts attention is that in the first alf of these chapters the centre of interest is Jerusalem, or Jerusalem and the neighbourhood, while in the second half it is Antioch. Here again it is easier to begin by taking the later chapters first, and to discuss the probable limits of the Antiochene tradition, together with the possibility that it may have lain before the writer of Acts as a document, before considering the Jerusalem tradition of the opening cliapters.
(a) The Antiochene tradition. — The exact limits of this tradition are difficult to fix. It is clear that to it the section describing the foundation of the church at Antioch and its early history (Ac IP^^") must be attributed ; but difficulties arise as soon as an attempt is made to work either backwards or forwards from this centre, as the later sections, which can fairly be attributed to Antiochene tradition, can also be attributed to the Pauline source, while the earlier sections of the same kind might be attributed to the Jerusalem tradition. It is obvious that the ol fxev odv Siaairapivrei of Ac 11'" picks up the narrative of S'"*. In S^-'* the story of Stephen's death is brought to a close by tlie statement that iyivero 8i iv iKeiv-Q ry Tifiipq. diajy/xos fiiyas eTrl t7]v iKKXrjcriav t7]v iv 'lepoaoKvfJiOLr iravTe^ Sk diecnrdprjaav /card rds x'^P"-^ . . . ol ij.ku odv 8La<nrap&r€i diiiXBov evaYye\(-^o/j.€voi rbv \6yov. Tlien the writer gives two instances of this evangelization by Philip and Peter in Samaria, and by Philip alone on the road to Gaza. Next he explains how the conversion of St. Paul put an end to the persecution, and how the conversion of Cornelius led to the recognition of preaching to Gentiles by the Jerusalem community. Finally, he returns to where he started from, and picks up his story as to the Christians who were dispersed after the death of Stephen, with the same formula — ol fiev oCv Siaa-irapivTes in 11'".