Jerusalem and the Unity of Believers (part 3)

In the previous day’s note, I examined the theme of the unity of the believers in Jerusalem in the early chapters of Acts (chs. 1-7); in so doing, I specifically discussed the first of two words or phrases used repeatedly by the author to express this sense of unity—e)pi\ to\ au)to/. Today I will be looking at the second expression—o(moqumado/n.

2. o(moqumado/n (homothymadón)

With one exception (Romans 15:6), all New Testament occurrences of this adverb are in the book of Acts. It is a compound derived from o(mo/$ (homós, “one”) and qu/mo$ (thýmos). This noun (qu/mo$, from qu/w) fundamentally refers to a violent movement (i.e. of wind, breath, etc), and so, for human beings, often the sense of “spirit, passion, anger”, and so forth. It would come to carry the more general anthropological semantic range of “soul, mind, will, disposition, temperment”, etc. as well. The adverb o(moqumado/n is typically translated as “of one mind/will/consent”, and so forth; a more literal rendering might be “of one impulse”, which I have chosen to use below. Here are the passages where this word is used in the book of Acts (note the proximity/pairing with the expression e)pi\ to\ au)to/):

  • Acts 1:14: “These [i.e. the apostles mentioned in v. 13] all were being strong/steadfast toward (each other) with one impulse (in) speaking toward (God) [i.e. prayer], (together) with (the) women and Maryam the mother of Jesus and his brothers.”
    • V. 15—e)pi\ to\ au)to/, in context of the ~120 (12 x 10) disciples mentioned parenthetically
  • Acts 2:46: “According to (the) day [i.e. daily], being strong/steadfast toward (each other) with one impulse in the sacred place [i.e. Temple], breaking bread according to (the) house, they took/received meat with (each other) in joyfulness and smoothness/simplicity [lit. without a stone/pebble] of heart.”
    • V. 44, 47—two instances of e)pi\ to/ au)to/: the first, a reference to the believers being/living together and holding all things in common; the second, a climactic reference to the community of believers, which was being added to (with new members/converts) each day.
  • Acts 4:24: “And the (believer)s having heard, with one impulse (they) took up voice toward God and said…”—in response to the arrest, and subsequent release, of Peter and John narrated in 4:1-22.
    • V. 26—e)pi\ to/ au)to/ cited from Psalm 2:2, referring to the opposite of Christian unity: earthly rulers come/join together against God and His Anointed (Christ).
  • Acts 5:12: “…and they were all (together) of one impulse in the pillared (porch) of Shelomoh [Solomon]”—a notice following the response to “signs and wonders” which occurred “through the hands of the apostles”.
  • Acts 7:57: “and crying (out) with a great voice, they pressed together [i.e. shut] their ears and rushed (together) with one impulse upon him…”—referring the the angry mob that attacks Stephen following his speech (7:2-53) and visionary claim (v. 55-56).
  • Acts 8:6: “and the crowds had (care) toward the (things) related under [i.e. by] Philip, with one impulse, in their hearing and seeing the signs which he did”—here, no doubt, the gentler “of/with one mind” would be a bit more appropriate.
  • Acts 12:20: Here o(moqumado/n is used in a political/diplomatic sense, of the representatives of Tyre and Sidon who came to Herod “of/with one mind/impulse” to seek peace.
  • Acts 15:25: “It seemed (good) to us, (having) come to be of one mind/impulse, to send toward you men gathered out [i.e. chosen] (along) with our beloved Paulus and Bar-Nabas”—part of the letter from the Jerusalem church in 15:22-29.
  • Acts 18:12: “…the Yehudeans [i.e. Jews] with one impulse stood against Paulus and led him upon the step (of judgment)”—o(moqumado/n in a hostile, anti-Christian sense, as in 7:57.
  • Acts 19:29: “and the city was filled with (people) poured-together [i.e. confusion], and they rushed (angrily) with one impulse into the show-place [i.e. theatre]…”—another instance of hostile usage.

The only other New Testament use of the word is in Romans 15:6:

5And (may) the God of remaining-under [i.e. patience/endurance] and calling-alongside [i.e. help/comfort] give to you the self(-same) thinking [i.e. to be of the same mind] in/among one another, according to (the) Anointed Yeshua, 6(so) that of one impulse in/with (a) single mouth you might give honor/esteem to [i.e. glorify] the God and Father of our Lord Yeshua (the) Anointed.

Here unity is clearly connected to our relationship with God the Father through Jesus Christ, and manifest in terms of confession and worship. Yet, the dynamic quality of this relationship—such as in the basic, elemental sense which underlies qumo$/o(moqumadon—remains. The New Testament usage, summarized above, can be clarified further into two different primary aspects:

    1. Acts of fervent, communal worship—positive, applied to the early believers
    2. Description of a agitated crowd pressed together and rushing to action—mainly negative, applied to opponents/enemies of Christ

This very much demonstrates the two sides of unity experienced by the early Church, and, indeed, by faithful believers throughout history.

(This article is part of the periodic series Jews & Gentiles and the People of God.)

Jerusalem and the Unity of Believers (part 2)

An important theme of the early chapters of Acts (chs. 1-7) is the unity of believers. This is described in a sequence of introductory/summary passages which punctuate the narratives in these chapters. The main references are:

    • Acts 1:14, part of a transitional passage (vv. 12-14) that follows the Ascension narrative (vv. 6-11).
    • Acts 1:15-26, an introductory, pattern-setting narrative which details the ‘reconstitution’ of the Twelve apostles, and containing a speech by Peter.
    • Acts 2:1, introduction to the Pentecost narrative (2:1-13).
    • Acts 2:42-47, a summary/transitional passage following Pentecost speech by Peter (vv. 14-40).
    • Acts 4:23-31, a narrative which runs, in many ways, parallel to that of 1:15-26, confirming the mission of the apostles and other believers.
    • Acts 4:32-37, a summary/transitional passage, which also serves to introduce the Ananias/Sapphira narrative (5:1-11).
    • Acts 5:42, summary verse to the narrative in 5:17-41 (for similar summary verses, see 2:41, 47b; 4:31[b]; 6:7).
    • Acts 6:1-6, a short narrative describing the first challenge to unity among the Jerusalem believers (note also the summary in v. 7).

It is only after the death of Stephen, and the onset of persecution (8:1-4, cf. also 11:19), that the (local/geographical) unity of the believers is broken—ironically, the dispersion/scattering (8:4) served to inaugurate the early Christian mission to the wider world outside of Jerusalem and Judea. Here are some key points in the descriptions of unity surveyed above:

    • They were devoted to prayer (1:14; 2:42; 4:31) and the teaching of the apostles (2:42; 6:4)
    • They were gathered together as a group/community in one location, which might vary “house to house” (2:1, 46; 4:31)—2:44 may also indicate some form of communal living (such as associated with the community of the Qumran texts)
    • They came together for the “breaking of bread”—common meals and/or eucharistic celebration (2:42)
    • They frequently gathered and attended in the Temple (Lk 24:53; 2:46, cf. also 3:1)
    • They held all things in common, selling possessions and providing for believers who were in need (2:44-45; 4:32, 34-37; 6:1)

There are, in particular, two expressions employed by the author of Acts to emphasize the unity of these early believers—e)pi\ to\ au)to/ and o(moqumado/n.

1. e)pi\ to\ au)to/ (epì tò autó)

This is a relatively common Greek idiom which the author of Acts (trad. Luke) uses in a distinctive manner. It is actually rather difficult to translate literally in English; the closest perhaps would be “upon the same (thing/place)”. In conventional English, it is typically rendered as “together”, in either: (a) a spatial-geographic sense [“in the same place”], (b) in terms of common identity [“for the same cause/purpose etc”], or (c) in the more generic sense of being gathered/grouped together. Where the expression occurs in the LXX, the generic or spatial sense is most likely meant (cf. Exod 26:9; Deut 12:15; 2 Sam 2:13; Ps 4:8[9]; Isa 66:17; Hos 1:11 [LXX 2:2]); a possible exception is the usage in Psalm 2:2, which would probably have been the reference most familiar to many early Christians (cf. Acts 4:25f). The expression also is used elsewhere in the New Testament in a similar manner, in Matt 22:34; Lk 17:35; 1 Cor 7:5; 11:20; 14:23; the last two references in Corinthians provide the closest context to the usage in Acts.

It is perhaps possible to trace a progression, of sorts, in the occurrences of the expression in the book of Acts:

  • Acts 1:15—here, in a parenthetical statement on the number of early believers gathered in Jerusalem, the expression is certainly used in a simple generic sense. However, the notice of the specific number—120—almost certainly is significant in relation to the symbolism of the disciples (the 12 apostles and 12 x 10) as a fulfillment/restoration of the twelve tribes of Israel.
  • Acts 2:1—here either the generic or spatial sense is primarily meant; the combined usage with the adverb o(mou= perhaps indicates the latter.
  • Acts 2:44—probably the spatial/geographic sense is meant here, i.e. the believers were living together (in the same place). To some degree, the communal life is implied, to which (by, for example, holding all possessions in common) is also attached or included a unity of purpose.
  • Acts 2:47b—this is the most difficult reference: “and the Lord set toward [i.e. added to] the (one)s being saved according to (the) day [i.e. daily] e)pi\ to\ au)to/“. The culminating expression is extremely difficult to translate accurately in context. Possibly it has the sense of “all together”, but clearly something more than simple grouping/gathering together is meant. The climactic and emphatic position of the expression suggests a deeper unity of identity and/or purpose is implied. New believers become part of the overall community, which, for the moment is spatially united (in Jerusalem and living/worshiping communally), but soon will be scattered (Acts 8:1-4; 11:19) into the wider mission field.
  • Acts 4:26—this use of the expression comes from a citation of Psalm 2:2 (mentioned above); the context is of earthly rulers taking counsel together (LXX “are led/brought together”) for a definite purpose and with hostile intent (“against the Lord [YHWH] and against his Anointed”). The expression e)pi\ to\ au)to/ translates Hebrew adverb dj^y~ yaµad, “as one, in union, together”. This is the opposite of the unity of early Christians; it is anti-Christian (i.e. unity against Christ), the joining together of enemies/opponents of Christ. The transitional narrative of Acts 4:23-31 reflects the prior arrest/interrogation of the leading apostles (in chapters 3-4) and foreshadows the challenges to unity recorded in chapters 5-6. As previously mentioned, with the execution of Stephen, and the onset of more intense persecution, hostility of enemies will break the spatial unity of believers; however, as 4:23-31 makes clear, the unity of purpose and identity remains unbroken. Perhaps it would be better to speak of unity of spirit (or Spirit), though this transcends ultimately the simple expression e)pi\ to\ au)to/.

It remains to look at the second expression for unity (o(moqumado/n), which I will do in the next day’s note.

(This article is part of the periodic series Jews & Gentiles and the People of God.)

Jerusalem and the Unity of Believers (part 1)

As indicated in the previous days’ notes on the Pentecost narrative (Acts 2:1-13), the setting of Jerusalem holds a central place in the narrative, both as a location and a theological motif. Indeed, the first chapters of Acts—up to and including the death of Stephen (chapters 1-7)—are devoted entirely to the early Christians living and ministering in Jerusalem. Only with the onset of severe persecution (Acts 8:1-4ff), do the disciples spread outward into the surrounding territories and nations—this notice is emphasized again in Acts 11:19, in order to introduce the Christians of Antioch and to set the stage for Paul’s missionary journeys. Once the Pauline narratives begin, the Jerusalem Church largely fades from view, only to reappear associated with two important episodes: (1) the ‘council’ held in Jerusalem (Acts 15) to discuss the role and place of the Gentile mission, and (2) the arrest of Paul upon his visit to Jerusalem (Acts 21, extending to the middle of chap. 23).

A proper understanding of the significance of Jerusalem in the early chapters of Acts, I believe, requires that one study the role it plays in the Gospel as well. Since, by general consensus, the third Gospel and Acts (as a 2-volume work) were written by the same author (trad. Luke), one would expect a fair degree of continuity in thought—both theological and artistic expression—in the two books. What follows is a summary of Jerusalem as a narrative setting and theological/spiritual theme in the Gospel of Luke. It is necessary to compare that which Luke has inherited as part of the wider Synoptic tradition with those elements unique to his Gospel.

Jerusalem in the wider Synoptic tradition

Within the Gospels of Matthew and Mark there are relatively few references to Jerusalem. Let us begin with:

1. What Matthew and Mark share in common. This is fairly simple:

    • General summary references to people coming from all around (including Jerusalem) to see Jesus—Mark 1:5; 3:8 (par Matt 3:5; 4:25, and, adapted somewhat in Luke 5:17; 6:17).
    • Reference to religious leaders (Scribes [and Pharisees]) coming from Jerusalem to see/question Jesus—Mark 3:22; 7:1 (par [latter reference only] Matt 15:1; no parallel in Luke)
    • The journey to Jerusalem, including a prediction by Jesus of his Passion which will take place there—Mark 10:32-33 (par. Matt 20:17-18, with a similar notice earlier in 16:21; partial parallel Luke 18:31 [cf. below])
    • Beginning with the Triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Mark 11:1ff; par Matt 21:1ff; Luke 19:28ff), Jesus remains in Jerusalem (or nearby Bethany) until his death and resurrection. All of the events of the Passion take place in Jerusalem; however, according to Matthew and (apparently) originally in Mark (cf. 16:1-8), Jesus’ (first) resurrection appearance to the disciples does not take place in Jerusalem, but rather in Galilee (Matt 28:7, 10, 16ff; Mark 16:7), contrary to what is narrated in Luke and John.

2. Details unique to Matthew. Apart from several minor additions to the Synoptic narrative (Matt 16:21; 21:10, etc), and a unique proverbial reference in Matt 5:35, there are only three significant episode or sayings involving Jerusalem:

    • The Infancy narrative (setting of Matt 2:1-8, 16), related to both the visit of the Magi and the slaughter of the children of Bethlehem in chapter 2.
    • The Jerusalem Temple setting in the Temptation scene—Matt 4:5ff (shared by Luke 4:9ff).
    • Jesus’ lament for Jerusalem—Matt 23:37ff, included at the end of the “Woes” against the religious leaders (Scribes and Pharisees) in chapter 23. The saying is part of the so-called Q tradition, for it also found in Luke 13:34f.

Jerusalem in the Gospel of Luke (beyond the Synoptic tradition)

This can be outlined as follows:

    • Jerusalem as a setting in the Infancy narratives
    • The expanded Journey to Jerusalem
    • Eschatological predictions by Jesus, set during Passion week
    • Post-resurrection appearances of Jesus

Jerusalem as a setting in the Infancy narratives

There are three episodes, each of which draws significantly upon Old Testament narrative and imagery:

  1. The angelic annunciation to Zechariah (Luke 1:5-23). This takes place while Zechariah is serving in the Temple (v. 8ff); indeed, the author has taken care (in v. 6) to emphasize that Zechariah and Elizabeth were both “just” (di/kaioi) and “without fault” (a&memptoi) in observing God’s commandments, and this faithful religious service in the Temple is a vital motif. The appearance of the heavenly Messenger, announcing the birth of John (vv. 11-17), like the announcement to Mary in 1:26-38, follows a pattern of similar angelic annunciations in the Old Testament, which I discussed in treating this passage in an earlier Advent season note.
  2. Jesus’ parents with the child in the Temple precincts (Luke 2:22-38). In establishing the setting for this narrative, the Gospel writer has combined (or conflated) two separate details: the purification offering for Mary following childbirth (v. 22a, cf. Leviticus 12), and the consecration of the firstborn (v. 23, cf. Exod 13:2-16) which Luke narrates (whether at the historical or literary level) as a presentation/dedication of the child before God (v. 22b, such as in 1 Sam 1:22ff). There are three important themes in this passage:
    a) The faithfulness of Joseph and Mary (similar to Zechariah and Elizabeth) in fulfilling their religious duties (cf. v. 39). That is, they represent devout, just/righteous Israelites.
    b) The encounters with Simeon (vv. 25-35) and Anna (vv. 36-38), two aged figures (in many ways parallel to Zechariah and Elizabeth) who reflect and represent devout, faithful Israelites—those who are looking toward receiving “the help/comfort of Israel” (v. 25) and “the ransom/redemption of Jerusalem” (v. 38), two expressions with strong Messianic and eschatological resonance.
    c) The central prophecy (oracle) of Simeon (vv. 29-32), which predicts the child Jesus’ future role as savior and light to both Jews and Gentiles (the second prediction in vv. 34-35 is darker and more difficult to interpret). Simeon’s oracle draws upon language especially from several key passages in so-called deutero-/trito-Isaiah (chs. 40-66). I have also discussed Lk 2:22-38 in some detail in an earlier Advent note.
  3. The child Jesus in the Temple precincts (Luke 2:41-51). This dramatic and challenging narrative centers upon the climactic words of Jesus to his parents (v. 49): “did you not know that it is necessary for me to be in/among the (thing)s of my Father?” The centrality of the Temple is the key to this episode, which I have discussed in prior notes.

The Journey to Jerusalem

Unlike the Gospel of John, which depicts Jesus making a number of different trips to Jerusalem (for the holy/feast days), the Synoptic Gospels record just one journey—that made prior to the events of Jesus’ Passion. In Mark and Matthew, this journey is mentioned only briefly, encompassing less than a single chapter (Mk 10:32-52; Matt 20:17-34). However, in the Gospel of Luke, this journey has been framed quite differently, extending from Lk 9:51 (which follows the corresponding point of Mk 9:41) all the way to Lk 18:15 (which corresponds again to Mk 10:13)—in other words, in place of the Mk 9:42-10:12, we have Lk 9:51-18:14 which comprises: (a) material located elsewhere in Matthew/Mark, and (b) sayings and parables only found in Luke. This enhances the journey scene greatly, for it depicts Jesus preaching and teaching extensively. But there are other important ways that the journey to Jerusalem is heightened. Note the following details and specific references to Jerusalem:

    1. In the transfiguration scene (Lk 9:28-36), the significance of the journey is foreshadowed in verses 30-31, where it is mentioned that Jesus conversed with Moses and Elijah (a detail unique to Luke’s account), speaking “of his way out [e&codo$, “exodus”, i.e. departure] which he was about to complete in Jerusalem”.
    2. In Lk 9:51, the journey is effectively inaugurated with the statement that Jesus “set his face/sight strong(ly) toward traveling [or, to travel] into Jerusalem”. This is mentioned again in verse 53, and it is the reason (i.e. his intention to go to Jerusalem) that he found no welcome in the Samaritan village. Though Samaritans are involved, this can probably be taken as a literary foreshadowing of the hostility Jesus would face in Jerusalem.
    3. This Lukan material covering the journey (Lk 9:51-19:27), is punctuated by three summary references to his journeying to Jerusalem: Lk 13:22; 17:11; and 19:11 (cf. also v. 28). The first two of these can be coordinated with a specific saying or prediction by Jesus regarding Jerusalem, and each can be related to significant eschatological teaching. Note how these correlate to divide the material:
    • Lk 13:22: “And he traveled (lit. passed [through]) accordingly down through the cities and villages, teaching and making passage into/unto Jerusalem”
      • Lk 13:34-35—a lament for Jerusalem (corresponding to Matt 23:37ff), which emphasizes the persecution/killing of prophets (cf. also the separate saying in Lk 13:33), with an eschatological prediction of judgment (v. 35)
    • Lk 17:11: “And it came to be in (his) passing (through) into/unto Jerusalem…”
      • Lk 18:31-33—the third (Synoptic) passion prediction by Jesus (par. Mk 10:32-34; Mt 20:17-19), which, unlike the two previous predictions, specifically mentions Jerusalem. In context here, it may also be worth noting the eschatological material (partially found in a different location in Matthew) earlier in Lk 17:20-37.
    • Lk 19:11, 28: these two narrative statements bracket the parable of the ten minas (19:12-27), effectively concluding the travel narrative, and leading into the Triumphal entry (19:28ff). Note the eschatological context of v. 11, similar to that of 17:20-37 above.

Eschatological predictions by Jesus

These are recorded as being uttered by Jesus in or near Jerusalem during Passion week (punctuating the narrative at three points):

    1. Lk 19:41-44 (just following the Triumphal entry)—a lament over Jerusalem with a (graphic) prediction of its destruction
    2. Lk 21:20-24 (partway during Passion week)—Jesus specifically (and again graphically) predicts the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, details not found elsewhere in the so-called Eschatological (Olivet) discourse shared by all three Synoptics (Mk 13; Matt 24), which only refer more generally to the suffering and travail of the time (but with destruction of the Temple indicated, Mk 13:2 par).
    3. Lk 23:28-31 (on the way to crucifixion)—a lament for the women/mothers of Jerusalem, for the great suffering they are about to endure during the siege/destruction of the city (implied).

Clearly, by combining and inserting this material as he has done, the Gospel writer has interwoven the fates of Jesus and Jerusalem in a most dramatic and moving way.

Post-resurrection appearances of Jesus

Unlike the Gospel of Matthew (and as one can infer from Mark 16:1-8), the Gospel of Luke records the first resurrection appearances of Jesus to the disciples as taking place in Jerusalem. The traditions in Luke are partially confirmed by the Gospel of John (Jn 20:1-10, 19-20), and, it would seem, from the long ending of Mark (Mk 16:9-13), though text-critical questions make it difficult to establish both parallels decisively. There are two main episodes:

  • The appearance to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35)—this extended, highly dramatic narrative is set in proximity to Jerusalem (v. 13, 18), and contains several key themes and motifs found throughout the Gospel and which are developed in the next episode.
  • The appearance to the Twelve (eleven) and larger group of disciples, along with their commission (Lk 24:36-53). This can, in turn, be divided into three parts:
    1) The appearance scene itself, vv. 36-43—this has a parallel in Jn 20:19-20.
    2) The exposition/commission by Jesus, vv. 44-49
    3) Jesus’ blessing and departure, vv. 50-53
    The last two sections are the most original to the Gospel of Luke, and each contain a key reference to Jerusalem:
    • VV, 47-49: the emphasis on Jerusalem as the beginning point of the Gospel proclamation, with the clear directive for the disciples to remain in the city until the coming of the Spirit (“power from out of the height”). This commission is tied in closely to an exposition of the Scriptures (vv. 44ff), in which Jesus “opened their mind/understanding” to recognize that the events of his suffering, death and resurrection were the fulfillment of Scripture (note the similar description and language in 24:25-27, 32).
    • V. 52-53: following the departure/ascension of Jesus, these two short verses narrate:
      • The disciples’ return to Jerusalem (see Acts 1:12 for the same motif)
      • That they were in the sacred place (the Temple) “through (it) all” (dia\ panto/$, i.e. continually), blessing/worshiping God. For similar references in Acts, see 1:14; 2:1, 42, and esp. 46-47 (which refer to their presence in the Temple precincts). Luke clearly intends to depict the early Christians as faithful and devout in matters of religion (like Zechariah/Elizabeth, Joseph/Mary, and Simeon/Anna in the Infancy narratives), by their presence in Jerusalem and association with the Temple—the new believers in Christ represent a continuation (and fulfillment) of the Old Testament patterns of religion.

(The article is part of the periodic series Jews & Gentiles and the People of God.)

Jews & Gentiles and the People of God

This is the first of several articles which will be posted periodically. The subject is so large, and the sensitivity surrounding it so great, that it must be approached with care (and some caution). I will be posting these articles to run parallel with another, related, exegetical study series on “The Law and the New Testament” (see the introduction). This initial article on “Jews & Gentiles and the People of God” follows several daily notes in which I examined the Pentecost narrative in Acts 2:1-13. I set forth as a fundamental theme of Acts 1-2 the Restoration of Israel (see the note for Pentecost Tuesday with a concluding follow-up note). Consider, especially, the parallel thematic structure of the narrative:

    • The disciples, representing the twelve tribes of Israel—the Twelve (reconstituted, Acts 1:15-26) and the wider group of around 120 (12 x 10) disciples—are united, coming together in one place (Acts 2:1)
      • where they experience the manifestation (power and presence) of the Spirit of God (parallel to the Sinai theophany)—esp. the tongues of fire, Acts 2:2-4
    • Jews from the surrounding nations, representing the dispersed twelve tribes of Israel, also come together in one place (Acts 2:5-6), eventually speaking together with a united voice (vv. 7-11)
      • where they too experience the manifestation of the Spirit (the “voice”, v. 6), as at Sinai, with the word (of God) heard being spoken in other tongues (i.e. their own languages), Acts 2:6-7ff

Note also a second parallel involving the nations (ta\ e&qnh):

    • Jews from the surrounding nations (where they had been dispersed) come together in Jerusalem
      • In the hearing of the separate languages of the nations they encounter and respond to the word of God (spoken by the disciples)—in so doing, they join with the 12/120 apostles/disciples to form a new, restored Israel
      • The disciples (who spoke the languages of the nations), are, in turn, dispersed out in to the surrounding nations (see esp. Acts 8:1-4; 11:19), where they proclaim the word of God (to Jews and Gentiles)
    • Jews and Gentiles in all the surrounding nations come together—as Israel and in Jerusalem (at the spiritual level)

To what extent can this second parallel be demonstrated as part of the original thought and purpose of the author of Acts (or his underlying tradition[s])? There are several passages where the mission to the Gentiles is clearly understood as fundamental to the “restoration of Israel”. Perhaps the most prominent is in the speech of James in Acts 15:13-21—there James cites Amos 9:11-12 in a most original and distinctive manner, tying the “rebuilt tent/booth of David” to the Gentile mission. I have discussed this passage in some detail in an earlier post.

Before proceeding to an introductory analysis of the basic idea of the “people of God”, it may be useful to survey some of the key eschatological references in the Old Testament prophets (and subsequent Jewish literature) where the role (and fate) of Gentiles in the end times is described. To begin with, let me reiterate two important aspects of the “restoration of Israel”, which I pointed out at the end of an earlier daily note (on the Pentecost narrative):

    1. The return of Israelites (Jews) from exile among the nations—this return is to the Promised Land, and, in particular, to Judah and Jerusalem.
    2. The Nations (Gentiles) come to Judah and Jerusalem, bringing tribute and/or worshiping the true God there.

The first aspect is an important and popular theme especially in the later Prophets (from the exilic/post-exilic periods), and, in particular, so-called deutero- and trito-Isaiah (Isa 40-55, 56-66, generally regarded by critical scholars as stemming from this late period, though the matter remains much in dispute). Here is a sampling of some key Isaian passages: Isa 43:5ff; 44:21-28; 48:12-21; 49:5ff; 51:11; 52:2, 7-12; 54:2-8; 55:12-13; 56:1-8; and throughout chapters 60-66, esp. 66:18-24. The imagery and sentiment of these passages largely concurs with that found in exilic/post-exilic prophets such as Ezekiel (esp. chapters 34, 37 and 47-48) and Zechariah 9-14, though in those books the military side of the restoration (i.e. the defeat/conquest of the nations, cf. below) is already becoming more prominent. The motif of restoration/return appears frequently, of course, in subsequent Jewish writings—e.g., Tobit 14:5; 2 Maccabees 2:7; Jubilees, 1:15-17ff; Testament of Benjamin 9:2, etc (selection courtesy of Sanders, pp. 79-82, see below).

With regard to the second aspect, E. P. Sanders (Jesus and Judaism, Fortress Press [1985], p. 214) provides a convenient summary of select passages related to the role and fate of the Gentiles, which I present here in modified form (with expanded references):

“People of God”

In the Old Testament Scriptures, the precise phrase “people of God” (formally <yh!ýa$–h*— <u^, ±am (h¹)°§lœhîm) is actually quite rare (Judg 20:2; 2 Sam 14:13), with the similar expression “people of YHWH” (hw`hy+ <u^, ±am YHWH) a bit more common (Num 16:41; Deut 27:9; Judg 5:11, 13; 1 Sam 2:24; 2 Sam 1:12; 6:21; 2 Kings 9:6; Ezek 36:20; Zeph 2:10). However, Israel is referred to as God’s people many times, including numerous instances where the revelatory/prophetic voice of God refers to Israel as “my people”. These occur frequently in the context of the Exodus—Ex 3:7ff; 5:1; 7:4; 8:22-23; 9:17 (“let my people go”, 5:1; 7:16; 8:1, 20-21; 9:1, 13; 10:3-4); the status of Israel as God’s people is summarized in Ex 33:16. The emphasis of Israel as God’s people is often that of holiness, related to the idea of covenant obligation; this is particularly noteworthy in Deuteronomy—Deut 7:6f; 14:2; 28:9; 29:13, etc—and throughout the Deuteronomic history (e.g., 1 Sam 2:29; 9:16-17; 2 Sam 3:18; 5:2; 7:7-11; 1 Ki 6:13; 8:16; 16:20). For the theme of holiness, see especially Lev 11:45; 19:2; 26:12.

The address of “my people” occurs regularly as a complaint or admonishment in the Psalms and Prophets (Ps 50:7; 78:1; 81:8-13; Isa 1:3; 3:12; 5:13; 10:24; 26:20; Jer 2:11ff; 4:22; 6:26; 7:23; 8:7ff; 18:15; Amos 7:8ff; Mic 6:3ff. In Hosea, there is particular emphasis upon the identity of Israel as God’s people, as the message fluctuates between one of condemnation and a promise of future restoration (Hos 1:9-10; 2:1, 23; 4:6, 8, 12; 6:11; 11:17). Indeed “my people” proves to be an important keynote, in Isaiah and the later (exilic/post-exilic) Prophets, when the theme of deliverance and restoration becomes more prominent; cf. for example in Isa 32:18; 40:1ff; 51:4ff; 52:4-12; 65:19ff; Jer 24:4-7; 30-31; 32:38ff; Ezek 11:19-20; 37:11-14; 39:7 (cf. also 38:16; 44:23).

I will explore similar language and imagery in the New Testament and contemporary Judaism in the next article.