Upgrade or commentaries

Hi, I was just looking for opinions on something's. I am a Methodist Local Preacher, and I have the bronze base package of Logos 5. I am wanting to invest some money and am considering either upgrading to silver or buying separate commentaries. It's the commentaries I am really after, and I was wondering for the ~£200 it would cost to upgrade, would you spend the money on an upgrade or maybe on commentaries and/or using community pricing etc.

thanks in advance

Tom

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mark Barnes

£200 it would cost to upgrade, would you spend the money on an upgrade or maybe on commentaries

Bronze->Silver is a good upgrade, as you add the 40-volume New American Commentary and the Church Fathers.

The alternative might be to buy the The Bible Speaks Today and Tyndale Commentaries — but I rather think all the extras in Silver make that upgrade better value for money. (The "extras" include Hebrew/English interlinear Bible, some Greek/English editions of the apostolic fathers, the Holman NT Commentary [$149.97], Concise Oxford English Dictionary [$29.95], some more Greek/Hebrew grammars, the Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer, Clause Search, and Referent Data).

My Logos 5 Buyers' Guide gives a bit more information.

Scott Wright

See if the Commentaries you desire (currently & future) are in Silver. It was much cheaper to upgrade (L4 Scholar to L5 Gold- with 18 month of payments). It had 3 commentary sets I desired to have plus some other resources so this was the way to go.

Scott

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597325#Comment_597325

Along the same lines as what Mark and Scott have said, I would look at the New American Commentary set, and decide if that is something you would want, and then see if the upgrade price to Silver would make more sense than just buying the set.

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597331#Comment_597331

Also, don't forget that they have a payment plan if that is something from which you could benefit.

Tom Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597331#Comment_597331

Is the New American Commentary a better alternative to Tyndale or the EBC or another commentary around that price? Its a really good commentary that I probably need more than anything else. Obviously there are extra things in the silver upgrade that i would get if I upgraded, but i don't really need any of those extras. Again, to be honest, its probably just a really good new testament commentary that I need more than anything, if the best option is the New American Commentary then I suppose the silver upgrade makes sense. What are your thought?

Tom

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597334#Comment_597334

Is the New American Commentary a better alternative to Tyndale or the EBC or another commentary around that price?

I wouldn't say NAC is better than Tyndale, but it's almost as good. I'd give:

Tyndale: 8.5/10 for content and 9/10 for value
NAC: 7.5/10 for content, 6/10 for value
EBC: 6/10 for content and 4/10 for value

But when it's part of a base package, the NAC suddenly becomes great value for money, hence the recommendation.

But if genuinely all you want are commentaries, then Tyndale+BST is better than NAC+Holman NT (the latter is what you get from Silver).

KJ Niblett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597337#Comment_597337

Tom I m a Baptist Pastor from Australia.

I have Portfolio with many extra commentaries I have purchased desperately.

I have not used the Holman Commentary very much at all, however when I had a look at the Holman commentary series it looks very good as a preaching tool.

Here is Acts 2 (I am currently preaching through the book of Acts)

Acts 2

A Church Is Born

I. INTRODUCTION
Symphony of the Spirit

II. COMMENTARY
A verse-by-verse explanation of the chapter.

III. CONCLUSION
A Model Church
An overview of the principles and applications from the chapter.

IV. LIFE APPLICATION
The Clever Monk
Melding the chapter to life.

V. PRAYER
Tying the chapter to life with God.

VI. DEEPER DISCOVERIES
Historical, geographical, and grammatical enrichment of the commentary.

VII. TEACHING OUTLINE
Suggested step-by-step group study of the chapter.

VIII. ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Zeroing the chapter in on daily life.

Quote

“The Holy Spirit longs to reveal to you the deeper things of God. He longs to love through you. He longs to work through you. Through the blessed Holy Spirit you may have: strength for every duty, wisdom for every problem, comfort in every sorrow, joy in His overflowing service.”

T. J. Bach

GEOGRAPHICAL PROFILE: PARTHIA

• Ancient empire to the east, south of the Caspian Sea
• Approximately the site of modern Iran
• As many as a million Jews may have lived in the East
• Peacefully coexisted with Rome through the first century A.D.
• A warrior society which never developed education and literature

GEOGRAPHICAL PROFILE: MEDIA

• A territory of 150,000 square miles
• A polytheistic society which later practiced Zoroastrianism
• Mentioned more than 20 times in Scripture, often in connection with Persia

GEOGRAPHICAL PROFILE: ELAM

• A country located on the east side of the Tigris River
• One of the earliest known civilizations
• Mentioned in Gen. 14:1; Isa. 21:2; 22:6; Jer. 25:25; 49:34–39
• Named for and founded by Elam a son of Shem (Gen. 10:22)

GEOGRAPHICAL PROFILE: MESOPOTAMIA

• The area between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers
• Territory roughly equivalent to modern Iraq
• Abraham’s original home (Acts 7:2)
• Babylon arose out of the central section of Mesopotamia

CITY PROFILE: CYRENE

• A Libyan city in North Africa, founded in 60 B.C
• Given to Rome by the last Ptolemy of Egypt
• Simon of Cyrene carried Jesus’ cross (Luke 23:26)
• Cyrenians helped establish the church at Antioch

IN A NUTSHELL

In summary, Luke writes to Theophilus in chapter 2: “You won’t believe what happened next. On the Day of Pentecost God sent the Holy Spirit upon these 120 believers in Jerusalem, and they began to proclaim the gospel in different languages. Peter preached a powerful sermon after which 3,000 people trusted Christ and the first New Testament church was born.”

A Church Is Born

I. INTRODUCTION

Symphony of the Spirit

Donald Barnhouse tells the story of driving in a car with a friend and being asked, “What’s your favorite symphony?” Barnhouse began whistling Brahms’ First Symphony. Then he thought, “How silly of me to try to convey the impact and splendor of Brahms through a whistle while driving.” He thought also of the magnificence of the human mind and how it somehow translated that meager whistle into brass, strings, and timpani in the mind of his friend who was also familiar with Brahms.
That is precisely how these early Christians felt as they waited and waited. They knew the facts about Jesus but lacked the power to deliver these facts to the city and the world. The Holy Spirit translates our meager whistling melodies into heavenly music others can grasp and understand. Then and now he makes witness possible by creating in us not just a strange sounding note or two but the symphony of the Spirit.
At the end of chapter 1 the believers gathered in silence and prayer. Obediently, they awaited the promise of the Holy Spirit’s coming and the Lord’s command for them to do nothing until that event occurred. Apart from the business of selecting Matthias to replace Judas, the believers engaged in no ministry activity, at least none that Luke reports. Now the second chapter bursts upon the scene with both audio and visual effects choreographed by God. Now the believers began to speak, and their message was clear from the beginning. What is found in these forty-seven verses represents one of the great miracles of the New Testament. It follows right on the heels of the resurrection. The chronological and theological linking of the resurrection and Pentecost keep these two events in the minds of believers throughout Acts. There seems to be an unwritten preaching code, sort of a first-century homiletical rule: “When in doubt, proclaim the resurrection, and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.”
This is not the first time we’ve seen the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. Luke introduced him in his Gospel (1:15) as a witness to the coming of Christ at the incarnation. Luke also recorded the role of the Holy Spirit in the virgin birth (1:35) and the descending of the Spirit upon Jesus at the time of his baptism (3:22).
The major teaching about the Holy Spirit thus far has come from John’s inkwell. In chapter 14 John recorded Jesus’ promise of the Spirit’s coming and emphasized that he will be in you (14:17). Then in chapter 16 John explained the link between the ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit: “Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you” (16:7b). Later in the same chapter, “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell what is yet to come. He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you” (16:13–14).
Just as the disciples had never understood the reality of the resurrection until they experienced it, they could never have grasped what the Lord intended for this miraculous day at Pentecost. Hesitant, confused, perhaps frightened, they burst forth as a group with the wonderful message of life. Across Jerusalem that day in multiple languages and with spiritual fervor, thousands heard the symphony of the Spirit.
Pentecost, commonly known as the Feast of Weeks, was established fifteen centuries before the birth of Christ and became one of the three great pilgrim festivals of the Jews. The name derived from the fact that the Jews celebrated it the fiftieth day after Passover. In the Old Testament it was viewed as the anniversary of the law given at Sinai. Now under the new covenant, it became the birthday of the church.

II. COMMENTARY

A Church Is Born

MAIN IDEA: Through the power of the Holy Spirit, Christians can proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, and people will believe and become a part of his body, the church.

A. Symbols of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 1–4)

SUPPORTING IDEA: God empowers his church for ministry through the coming of the Holy Spirit.

2:1–2. Throughout this book Luke records the togetherness the early Christians enjoyed. Here, at the beginning of everything, we find them all together. They heard a sound like the blowing of a violent wind, certainly an experience with which all of us can identify. The word for wind is pneuma, the same word Jesus used in talking about the Spirit and the wind with Nicodemus (John 3:7–8).
Wind filling the whole house reminds us of God’s presence filling the temple in the Old Testament. If you live in the south, the midwest, or parts of Canada, you might imagine a tornado inside the house. East coast and Gulf state people might recognize the experience of a hurricane, but again, inside the house. Luke was probably not present for this event, but we can imagine that he heard his colleagues describe it scores of times, for it was a day they could never forget.
2:3. We need to be careful with the language of the text. The sound was not a wind but like a wind. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire. Apparently, the fire started as one and then separated and came upon them. Like wind, the Bible commonly associates fire with the presence of God, as Moses found out one day in the desert (Exod. 3:2). Since this entire experience was highly symbolical, it may not be inappropriate for us to see in the single then multiple fire the unity and diversity in the body of Christ.
2:4. A third physical phenomenon experienced on the Day of Pentecost was the use of different languages. Throughout Acts, Luke uses different verbs to describe the coming of the Spirit upon new believers. This first time was a unique event, never again repeated in exactly the same way. When we look at the entire New Testament teaching on the Holy Spirit, we see the word baptism associated with initial conversion and the word filling with ministry. The first seems to happen once without repetition; the second occurs with frequency as believers allow God’s Spirit to produce powerful work through them.
Most evangelical scholars believe the tongues of Pentecost were genuine languages, not the ecstatic sounds Paul dealt with at Corinth (1 Cor. 14:1–12). Two arguments rise strongly to emphasize that these tongues represented languages not previously learned. First, the use of the word dialektos in verses 6 and 8 can only refer to a language or dialect. Second, the paragraph that follows (vv. 5–12) specifically emphasizes the fact that people of different languages understood the message of the Christians in their own language.
Some argue for a miracle of hearing as well as speaking in this chapter. The text does not really justify that. On the other hand, when people filled with the Holy Spirit proclaim the gospel, a supernatural ministry always takes place. When the hearers respond, a miracle of understanding certainly follows.

B. Results of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 5–13)

SUPPORTING IDEA: Sometimes unbelievers make fun of Christians who act in ways God empowers them.

2:5–6. Like Paul, Luke occasionally engages in deliberate exaggeration such as his suggestion that there were pious Jews residing in Jerusalem from every nation under heaven. Probably we should understand him to mean that people speaking many other languages were present on the Day of Pentecost and each heard the message in his or her own language or dialect. We might ask, if they resided in Jerusalem, wouldn’t they have understood Aramaic, or at least Greek? Doubtless many of them did; but part of the miracle was God’s ability to proclaim his message in multiple languages through uneducated people who spoke almost exclusively Aramaic and Greek.
Some have suggested that the Feast of Pentecost might very well have attracted over two hundred thousand Jews from all over Palestine and the Mediterranean world. Nothing indicates that they heard the wind or saw the flames; but the sound of languages—perhaps dozens of them—captured their attention immediately.
2:7–11. The speakers amazed Jerusalem’s visitors as much as did the language: are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? After the introductory question raised by the bewildered guests, they identified fifteen language groups, roughly scattered from east to west, who heard the believers declaring the wonders of God in their own languages. Luke tells us they were bewildered and perplexed. Twice he used the word amazed. Many of the disciples (all of the eleven) came from Galilee, but that label for the group does not necessarily mean that all 120 came from that province. Jesus was a Galilean, and his followers were therefore known by that group name.
Luke’s list of fifteen geographical locations was a group of nations or areas in which known Jewish populations existed and would likely have sent representative groups to the Feast of Pentecost. Everyone there who spoke a language other than Greek or Aramaic heard the message of the Christians in that language—maybe fifteen languages, maybe fifty, maybe more. The languages differed; the message remained the same: the wonders of God.
2:12–13. What a wonderful question to hear after one has proclaimed the wonders of God. Surely every pastor would like to have a congregation ask about every sermon, What does this mean? Like most congregations, not everyone agreed that this event had significant meaning. Some simply mocked, they have had too much wine (v. 13). This word for wine (gleukos), used only here in the Bible, leaves no doubt of the mockers meaning. Peter’s explanation in the following verses says pointedly, These men are not drunk, as you suppose (v. 15). People shocked by a supernatural phenomenon may choose to accept God’s hand at work in his world, or they may turn away and chalk it up to something else. When they make the latter choice, drunkenness offers as good an explanation as any.

D. Explanation of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 22–36)

SUPPORTING IDEA: The message of the gospel rests on historical facts coupled with prophetic foundations intended to lead believers to a repentant faith.

2:22–28. The Book of Acts contains twenty-three sermons or speeches, including seven by Peter and eleven by Paul. Verse 22 stands in the middle of Peter’s first public sermon. Verses 14–16 constitute the introduction; verses 17–21 make up the text; verses 22–36 form the body; and verses 38–41 offer the conclusion/application.
2:22. During Jesus’ time on earth his ministry was guaranteed by threefold evidence—miracles, wonders, and signs—precisely the marks of an apostle which Paul identified in 2 Corinthians 12:12. Interestingly, first-century Jews didn’t deny Jesus’ miracles; that seems to be a theological characteristic of more modern times. The key term of the verse is surely the word accredited, used often in first-century Greek for people holding some official office. Jesus’ mighty acts pointed to divine power behind his life and ministry, thereby certifying that he was the Messiah.
2:23. Frequently the New Testament links predestination and free will, the two elements of a divine paradox. God handed over Jesus for crucifixion, but wicked men put him to death. So often people ask, “Does God choose us for salvation, or do we choose to believe the gospel?” Human reason searches for philosophical solutions, but the only biblical answer is a simple yes. Somehow in God’s eternal plan these two seemingly parallel roads come together.
2:24–28. Peter’s sermon progresses well; in typical New Testament form, he comes right to the point: resurrection. Verses 25–35 in this chapter contain four evidences of the resurrection: David’s tomb, the witnesses, that very Day of Pentecost, and the ascension witnessed by the eleven disciples. God may have handed Jesus over for crucifixion, but he also raised him from the dead. As strange as it might seem to the human mind, Messiah’s death was God’s will.
Thus Peter turns to Psalm 16:8–11. Surely readers of the Old Testament up to this point had applied Psalm 16 only to David. Peter, speaking through the Holy Spirit, now certified it as a messianic prophecy. He did not use the psalm to prove the resurrection, but to affirm the messiahship of Jesus. Peter didn’t bother to prove the resurrection at all—he just proclaimed it. God raised Jesus to experience joy in your presence.
2:29–30. Something new has been added. Not only was David’s psalm a messianic prophecy, but the application of the psalm to Jesus is also linked with the fact that the Messiah came in David’s line. David may have considered himself a shepherd and a king, but Peter tells us he was also a prophet, whether aware of it or not. We see here a major key to understanding Scripture, namely—Christ is the unifying link between Old and New Testaments. Luke had already concluded his first report to Theophilus on precisely this point: “Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things’ ” (Luke 24:45–48).
2:31–32. Not only did David understand Jesus’ coming, he also foretold his resurrection. Standing in the crowd that day were many local residents who were familiar with the events that had transpired in Jerusalem less than two months earlier. Just in case their memories had lasped, Peter raised again the broad banner of those courageous early Christians: we are all witnesses of the fact.
2:33–36. Peter wanted to proclaim the whole gospel, so he could not stop at the crucifixion and resurrection. In these verses he moves on to the exaltation and the coming of the Holy Spirit, bringing his listeners right up to the moment. Another quote from the Psalms (110:1) surely must have stabbed their collective attention. The humble carpenter of Nazareth was not only the Messiah, but now he lives in heaven and has caused all the Pentecostal commotion which evoked this sermon in the first place. Showing an enormous confidence in his God and his message, Peter used a phrase appearing only here in the New Testament (all Israel) and hammered home his final point: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. In fine homiletical style he returned to his original text (v. 21) and, along with the prophet Joel, extolled the messiahship of his Lord. The one you think dead is your living Lord, Master, and Messiah!

E. Response to the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 37–41)

SUPPORTING IDEA: Jesus Christ the Son of God died and rose again to provide forgiveness of sins to all who believe.

2:37. The combination of God’s Scripture and God’s Spirit working through God’s servant had the intended effect. From their initial question What does this mean? (2:12), the people now progressed to specific response—Brothers, what shall we do? The phrase cut to the heart translates katenugesan meaning “stung” or “stunned.” Had some people listening to Peter that day also screamed for blood in Pilate’s hall? While the word conviction does not appear in our verse, this clearly reflects that heart attitude. The New Testament uses this word to describe the work of the Holy Spirit by which we see ourselves as we are in God’s sight.
2:38–39. Peter hesitated not a moment for the answer to their question, calling for repentance and baptism and offering forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Repentance is not a new theme in the New Testament, having appeared in the ministry of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3) and in the preaching of Jesus (Mark 1:15; Luke 13:3). The context shows baptism here refers to water, not the Holy Spirit. In the New Testament, water baptism became the uniform of the Lord’s people. Today we call it “believers’ baptism,” the conscious identification with Jesus on the part of those who have trusted him for salvation. The gift of the Holy Spirit then became the seal of salvation. To whom is this available? For all whom the Lord our God will call.
2:40–41. Luke hastens to tell us we do not have the entire sermon recorded in his book. Peter spoke many other words and pleaded with his hearers who responded. That day God added three thousand people to the small number of believers already serving as Christ’s witnesses. But wait. Don’t miss the importance of what Luke does not say. This time there was no sound, no flame, and no foreign language. These people received the Holy Spirit because that’s what Peter promised in Jesus’ name. Pentecost was a one-time event, with only a mild echo or two appearing elsewhere during the first century.
Are we to believe that Peter baptized three thousand people on that one day? Of course not. The Bible knows no hierarchical system whereby people must be baptized at the hand of some official or titled clergy. We should probably assume all 120 believers assisted in this magnificent demonstration.
In the space of just a few verses, we see what happens when people trust Christ for salvation. First, they must recognize their need; then, they must receive God’s gift; and finally, they must obey the message.

F. Purpose of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 42–47)

SUPPORTING IDEA: Unity affords the greatest identifying mark of the people of God. That’s why Luke emphasizes, all the believers were together and had everything in common.

2:42. At various times in Acts, especially in the early chapters, Luke gives summary reports of how the church is doing. Here we have the first. In it our author describes what a biblical church really looks like, not only in the first century, but in every century from the Lord’s ascension until his second coming.
A biblical church is marked by teaching. Thousands of new converts needed to understand precisely how Peter linked Old Testament text with the ministry of Jesus. Theologians call it “Messianic Christology”. It became the core of New Testament doctrine.
Furthermore, the new Christians engaged in fellowship. Someone called the church “the colony of heaven.” Here the believers fulfilled the words the Lord gave his disciples just before the crucifixion: “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:34–35).
Then the believers joined in breaking bread—Luke’s term for what Paul calls “the Lord’s Supper.” Quite possibly they practiced it differently than many churches do now, likely with a full meal. Still, the memorial to the Lord’s death until he comes again remains the central theme of believers breaking bread together. Quite likely, the phrase also describes Christians fellowshipping together at meal time.
Their worship also included prayer, in our text literally, “the prayers.” New prayers and old. Probably public and private.
2:43–45. In addition to their worship, these believers became actively involved in the work of the Lord. Luke uses the same language to describe the apostles that he used of Jesus in 2:22. The miracles showed evidence of a new era. God gave miracles when Moses brought down the law and when Elijah and other prophets thundered a new message across Israel. “Miracles” does not appear in Acts after chapter 15, even though God continued to do miracles beyond that point.
Their work also included learning how to live and love together. They sold their possessions and made sure everybody had plenty. Communism? Absolutely not—this was voluntary, contemporary, and discretionary.
2:46–47. The early church was marked by faithful attendance—meeting together daily in the temple courts. They prayed, gave, ate, and rejoiced together. They practiced the presence of Jesus—still a good idea for his people. Luke makes good use of the Greek word homothumadon, translated together, applying it in 1:14; 2:46; 4:24; and 5:12.
Their witness included a demonstration of hospitality. No home would be large enough to house even a small group of believers for a short time, so they literally went house to house. Luke wants us to see how good it was—they enjoyed favor with the people. Not the Sanhedrin, but common folks all around the city. Witnessing may be the main theme in Acts, but praising certainly represents a secondary strain common in Luke’s writings (the word ainountes is used nine times in the New Testament, seven by Luke). What happens to believers who worship, work, and witness for their Lord? The Lord grows the church. Let’s not miss the order—first godly relationships with each other, then growth.

MAIN IDEA REVIEW: Through the power of the Holy Spirit, Christians can proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ and people will be saved and become a part of his body, the church.

III. CONCLUSION

A Model Church

What a magnificent chapter! Instead of a humble and subdued group of Christians praying quietly in an upper room, we now have over three thousand people all over the city praising, praying, and witnessing for Jesus. The early church was a healthy church, a veritable model of what congregations can be in our day when they take seriously the biblical qualifications of what it means to be the church.
Irenaeus served as bishop of Lyons from approximately A.D. 175–195. In his book Against Heresies he wrote

This preaching, as cited, and this Faith, as aforementioned, the Church although scattered in the whole world, diligently guards as if it lived in one house, and believes, like the above, as if it had one mind and the same heart, and preaches and teaches and hands on these things harmoniously, as if it had but one mouth. And although there are different languages in the world, the force of the tradition is one and the same.

PRINCIPLES

• The controlling power of God’s Holy Spirit is available to all believers.
• The gospel calls for repentance and faith.
• Both historical facts and Bible prophecy affirm that Jesus is God’s Messiah.
• Every believer has the Holy Spirit within them.
• Healthy churches pay careful attention to teaching, fellowship, prayer, and witness.

APPLICATIONS

• Trust God’s Spirit for the power to serve him.
• Proclaim Jesus’ resurrection at every opportunity.
• Understand how the Old Testament and New Testament fit together.
• Participate with other believers in biblical behavior.
• Enjoy your Christian faith.

IV. LIFE APPLICATION

The Clever Monk

I once heard a wonderful story about a young monk who was called on to preach his first sermon at the monastery. Frightened and intimidated, he opened with a question: “How many of you know what I am about to say?” When no one raised a hand, he timidly admitted, “Well I don’t either” and dismissed the assembly with the traditional Dominus vobiscum, “the Lord be with you.”
Of course, his superiors would not let him off the hook with that kind of behavior, so a week later he was back on the same platform. To everyone’s surprise, he asked the same question: “How many of you know what I am about to say?” This time the brothers determined to teach him a lesson, so everyone present raised a hand. Courageously, the young monk smiled and said, “Well, since you already know, you don’t need to hear the sermon. Dominus vobiscum.”
After a severe reprimand he slowly ascended the stairs of the platform yet a third time. Slowly, but deliberately, he astonished the audience with his now traditional question: “How many of you know what I am about to say?” To completely unbalance this clever amateur, half the brothers raised a hand, the other half did not. “Well,” said the young monk, “those of you who know tell those who don’t know. Dominus vobiscum.” And he dismissed the group.
We may feel like that young monk. We may think we don’t know enough to preach to others or that we are not mature enough to present ourselves as prime examples of the Christian faith. We can all share with others the experiences we have had in our lives up to this point. If we are new Christians, we can at least tell others that we know Jesus and can help others know him. We don’t need to be trained theologians. We can simply tell others what our own experience has been.
“We are witnesses,” said Peter. Luke makes that theme the banner of his book. Like the early Christians, witnesses are simply people who know, telling people who don’t know, what God has made possible through the death, resurrection, and exaltation of his Son, Jesus Christ. We do not need to be brilliant theologians to fulfill that mission, but we do need to be biblical Christians.
The last part of our chapter forces us to examine our own congregations and our individual roles in those congregations. Do our contemporary churches feature these biblical characteristics? If so, special programs and growth formulas are probably unnecessary.
God understands all our shortcomings, our failures, and our problems. Yet he has no other plan for sharing the good news with the world than the proclamation of his people. When we truly believe the power of Peter’s message and truly behave like these early believers, some day a future historian may write of our churches, And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

V. PRAYER

Father, thank you for the wonderful gift of the Holy Spirit. May we allow him total control of our lives so that our behavior as individuals, family members, and participants in the body of Christ may be everything God wants to show a needy world. Amen.

VI. DEEPER DISCOVERIES

A. Filled With the Spirit (v. 4)

This special filling at Pentecost was unlike other fillings described both in the Book of Acts and in Paul’s epistles. Luke used an adjective and two verbs for filling. The adjective was also used of Stephen (7:55), and one of the verbs (pleróo) appears in Acts only once in reference to the Holy Spirit (13:52). The form of the verb indicates that the believers were being filled, suggesting a continuous process, not only throughout the Day of Pentecost, but repeatedly. For the Christian there is one baptism and many fillings. Baptism places believers in the body of Christ, and filling enables them to minister in the power of the Holy Spirit. Not all Christians would make this distinction, however; some believe that baptism and filling form exactly the same event or process.
Notice that Luke emphasizes the outward demonstration. Since the concepts of Spirit and wind are linked together, perhaps we can use yet another illustration—steam. Steam is not visible and, technically, not wet. What comes out of a boiling tea kettle forms a visible mist as steam condenses into water droplets. We know what happens as heat creates steam in the kettle, but we don’t see it. We do, however, observe what steam does: it burns a hand passed through it; it coats windows in a bathroom during a hot shower or bath; and it serves a multitude of uses from clearing sinuses to softening a piece of frozen food.
In reading Acts 2 we must at the same time recognize the enormous miracle Luke describes and acknowledge it as a historical, never-repeated event. That balance does not minimize the work of the Holy Spirit in contemporary believers, but brings us into an awareness of how God’s Spirit is so essential in everything we do. So essential in fact, that Peter makes it a part of the promise of salvation in verse 38.
Paul picked up precisely the same analogy Peter used of drunkenness and Spirit-control when he wrote the Ephesians, “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph. 5:18–20). Obviously, the Spirit empowers for worship, service, and testimony. Just as too much alcohol controls a person’s behavior in the wrong way, so the Holy Spirit intends to control the Christian’s behavior in God’s way. Believers are to submit themselves voluntarily to the control of the Holy Spirit who lives in them, resulting in peace, joy, and harmony with other believers.

B. Foreknowledge (v. 23)

The death of Jesus was not accidental, nor was it under the control of Jewish religious leaders or Roman politicians. His death fulfilled prophecy, and all the human instruments involved served God’s eternal plan. Without realizing it, they carried out the will of God (Acts 13:27). This is the eternal paradox of divine sovereignty and human freedom. God works in human events to bring about his will, even events tainted by human sin.
Many times, perhaps most times, we do not understand how or why he is working. Who can explain God’s plan through Adolf Hitler? What did God have in mind in the genocide of Bosnia? What are we to make of the brain cancer death of a young wife who leaves behind a grieving husband and three small children? Certainly, we shall never understand any of it this side of heaven. We know that God sovereignly carries out precisely what he intends in the world and the ultimate eternal result is good, because God is good.
Perhaps the key here again is balance—not to allow one truth to throw another into lesser importance. Our verse is most helpful. Peter clearly says that God’s foreknowledge and purpose brought about the cross. In the same breath he tells the men of Israel that they put him to death by nailing him to the cross. Human responsibility cannot be absolved because they became instruments in carrying out God’s greater plan.
How does all this relate to the issue of personal salvation? Do we “find God”? Or does God elect us to salvation? The Scriptures affirm both truths. There is no possibility, nor any need, for us to understand everything that goes on in the mind of God. That is why the Bible so often refers to the Christian life as faith.

C. Repentance (v. 38)

The word repentance (metanoia) derives from two other words, meta meaning “after” and nous, the word for “mind.” Repentance means “to change one’s mind” or even more precisely, “to turn and go in the opposite direction.” The dominant idea of this verse clearly centers in repentance with the other aspects following logically in order. Repentance moves a person to baptism, forgiveness, and the gift of the Holy Spirit, not necessarily in that specific order.
Verses like Acts 2:38 remind us of that wonderful and deeply theological hymn, “Once For All.”

Free from the law, O happy condition,
Jesus hath bled, and there is remission;
Cursed by the law and bruised by the fall,
Grace hath redeemed us once for all.
Now we are free—there’s no condemnation,
Jesus provides a perfect salvation;
“Come unto me,” O hear His sweet call,
Come, and He saves us once for all.
Children of God, O glorious calling,
Surely His grace will keep us from falling;
Passing from death to life at His call,
Blessed salvation once for all.
Once for all—O sinner, receive it;
Once for all—O brother, believe it;
Cling to the cross, the burden will fall,
Christ hath redeemed us once for all.

D. Church (vv. 42–47)

How interesting that the actual word church does not appear in these six verses, though Luke describes it precisely. We use the word in at least four different ways, to identify a building, a denomination, a local congregation, and the body of Christ.
We may say of the building in which we meet on Sunday mornings, “I’m going down to the church to pick up some materials for my Sunday school class next week.” It may be Tuesday morning, and we understand that the body of Christ is not there, just the building in which they meet. This usage works in casual conversation as long as we understand the Bible never applies the word to describe a building or a specific place of worship. The New Testament claims that God’s people do not have to be in a specific place to worship.
Nor does the word church appear in the Bible to describe a denomination. Today we talk about the Methodist Church, the Baptist Church, or the Church of God. We do no harm with such terminology as long as we understand that this human construct does not constitute theological truth. What we mean is that groups of congregations have come together to form a larger representation of the body of Christ, and so we use the word church.
The New Testament regularly uses the word church in reference to local congregations. We read about the Church of Ephesus and the Church at Philippi. The Book of Revelation opens with letters to seven churches. In every case, these are gatherings of believers who likely did not meet in specific buildings and had no affiliation with any larger group other than geographical connections. This is the most common New Testament use and the one we find in our passage at the end of Acts 2.
Finally, all believers of all places and ages are placed by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ and, therefore, become a part of the universal church. The universal church finds embodiment in local churches (congregations) like the one developed at Jerusalem after Peter’s sermon. Ephesians tells us much about the universal church.

VII. TEACHING OUTLINE

A. INTRODUCTION

1. Lead Story: Symphony of the Spirit
2. Context: We dare never forget that the Book of Acts is history, and chapter 2 describes a pivotal point in that history. It is inseparable from chapter 1, for we have read of the believers gathered in Jerusalem waiting for the coming of the Spirit. Now in chapter 2, the Holy Spirit comes, and thousands more believe to form the church. We have become part of them. The same resurrected and ascended Lord gives the same Holy Spirit to believers in our day. We are baptized into the body and filled with his Spirit to carry out appropriate works of service for Jesus. The more we behave like the believers described in verses 42–47, the more the Lord can add to our numbers those who are being saved.
3. Transition: Acts 2 introduces the dispensation of the New Covenant church. The word dispensation obviously is built on dispense, meaning “to give.” The Father gave the Son; the Son gave the Spirit; the Spirit gives us life, that we may give the gift of love—and the gift goes on. Luke mentions six things related to the birth of the church in chapter 2:

B. COMMENTARY

1. Symbols of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 1–4)
a. Sound of wind (vv. 1–2)
b. Appearance of flame (v. 3)
c. Use of languages (v. 4)
2. Results of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 5–13)
a. Popularity (vv. 5–6)
b. Proclamation (vv. 7–11)
c. Perplexity (vv. 12–13)
3. Prophecy of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 14–21)
a. Drunkenness denied (vv. 14–16)
b. Prophecy affirmed (vv. 17–21)
4. Explanation of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 22–36)
a. Historical facts (vv. 22–28)
b. Prophetic foundation (vv. 29–36)
5. Response to the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 37–41)
a. People must see their need (v. 37)
b. People must receive God’s gift (vv. 38–39)
c. People must obey the message (vv. 40–41)
6. Purpose of the Spirit’s Coming (vv. 42–47)
a. Worship (v. 42)
b. Work (vv. 43–45)
c. Witness (vv. 46–47)

C. CONCLUSION: THE CLEVER MONK

VIII. ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

1. Should your church be praying for a Pentecost experience in your midst? Why?
2. What message does verse 21 have for you and your church?
3. How would you explain who Jesus is to an unbeliever?
4. Who needs to repent and be baptized? Why?

Kenneth O. Gangel, Acts, vol. 5, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998).

Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:40 PM 29 May 2014.

KJ Niblett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597340#Comment_597340

Another commentary which you would pick up going from Bronze to Silver is the Bible Knowledge Commentary.
Some people don't rate this commentary very highly, however I have found it to be very useful for preaching. And I can also infer that others in the Logos community use this resource as there are a lot of popular highlights present in this resource.

3. THE INCEPTION OF THE CHURCH (CHAP. 2).

a. The descent of the Holy Spirit (2:1–13).

2:1. The day of Pentecost was an annual feast that followed the Feast of Firstfruits by a week of weeks (i.e., seven weeks, or 49 days) and therefore also was called the Feast of Weeks (cf. Lev. 23:15–22). The name “Pentecost,” of Greek derivation, means 50 because it was the 50th day after the Firstfruits feast (Lev. 23:16).
Where the followers of Christ were gathered at this time is not definitely known. Luke simply wrote, They were all together in one place. Perhaps they were in the temple precincts. However, the place is called a “house” (Acts 2:2), an unlikely designation for the temple, though it may be referred to as a house (cf. 7:47). If they were not assembled at the temple, they must have been near it (cf. 2:6).
2:2–3. The references to “wind” and “fire” are significant. The word for “Spirit” (pneuma) is related to pnoe, the word translated “wind” here. It also means breath. Both nouns—“spirit” and “wind” or “breath”—are from the verb pneō, “to blow, to breathe.” The sound like the blowing of a violent wind … from heaven points to the power of the Holy Spirit and the fullness of His coming.
The tongues of fire portray the presence of God. Several times in the Old Testament God displayed Himself in the form of flames (Gen. 15:17; Ex. 3:2–6; 13:21–22; 19:18; 40:38; cf. Matt. 3:11; Luke 3:16).
No believer there was exempt from this experience, for the flames separated and came to rest on each of them.
2:4. The filling with the Holy Spirit is separate from the baptism of the Spirit. The Spirit’s baptism occurs once for each believer at the moment of salvation (cf. 11:15–16; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 12:13; Col. 2:12), but the Spirit’s filling may occur not only at salvation but also on a number of occasions after salvation (Acts 4:8, 31; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 9:17; 13:9, 52).
An evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit was other tongues (heterais glōssais; cf. 11:15–16). These were undoubtedly spoken living languages; the word used in 2:6, 8 is dialektō, which means “language” and not ecstatic utterance. This gives insight into what is meant by “tongues” in chapters 2; 10; 19; and in 1 Corinthians 12–14.
This event marked the beginning of the church. Up to this point the church was anticipated (Matt. 16:18). The church is constituted a body by means of Spirit baptism (1 Cor. 12:13). The first occurrence of the baptism of the Spirit therefore must indicate the inauguration of the church. Of course Acts 2:1–4 does not state that Spirit baptism took place at Pentecost. However, 1:5 anticipates it and 11:15–16 refers back to it as having occurred at Pentecost. The church, therefore, came into existence then.
2:5–13. Jews of the “diaspora” (dispersion; cf. James 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1) were … in Jerusalem for the feast. Perhaps they were bilingual, speaking both Greek and their native languages. They were dumbfounded to hear Jews from Galilee speaking the languages of peoples surrounding the Mediterranean Sea.
It is a question whether only the Twelve spoke in tongues or all 120. V 2, p 358 Several factors support the idea of only the Twelve being involved in this phenomenon: (1) They are referred to as Galileans (Acts 2:7; cf. 1:11–13). (2) Peter stood up with “the Eleven” (2:14). (3) The nearest antecedent of “they” in verse 1 is the “apostles” in 1:26. However, a problem with this view is that the number of languages listed in 2:9–11 is more than 12. But one apostle could have spoken more than one language, in sequence. Still it is possible that all 120 spoke in tongues. Since the majority of them were from Galilee they could have been called Galileans. The references to the Twelve would have indicated they were the leaders of the 120.
The topic the people discussed in all these languages was the wonders of God. It seems they were praising God. Their message was not one of repentance; it was not the gospel.
Unable to explain this miracle away, the Jewish unbelievers were puzzled, and some resorted to scoffing and asserted, They have had too much wine. The word “wine” (gleukous) means new sweet wine.

b. The discourse of Peter (2:14–40)

This sermon has basically one theme: Jesus is the Messiah and Lord (v. 36). Peter’s discourse may be outlined as follows:

OUTLINE

I. This is the fulfillment of prophecy (vv. 15–21)
A. A defense (v. 15)
B. An explanation (vv. 16–21)
II. Jesus is the Messiah (vv. 22–32)
A. His works attest that He is the Messiah (v. 22)
B. His resurrection attests that He is the Messiah (vv. 23–32)
III. Jesus, the glorified Messiah, poured forth the Holy Spirit (vv. 33–36)
IV. Application (vv. 37–40)

2:14–15. Peter began with a rebuttal of their accusation of drunkenness. It was only 9 in the morning (lit., “the third hour of the day”; days began at 6 A.M.), far too early for a group of revelers to be inebriated!
2:16–21. Instead of being drunk the believers were experiencing what was described in Joel 2. In Peter’s words, This is what was spoken by the Prophet Joel. This clause does not mean, “This is like that”; it means Pentecost fulfilled what Joel had described. However, the prophecies of Joel quoted in Acts 2:19–20 were not fulfilled. The implication is that the remainder would be fulfilled if Israel would repent. This aspect of contingency is discussed more fully in the comments on 3:19–23.
2:22. Jesus’ miracles, Peter said, were God’s way of verifying Jesus’ claims to you, the Jews (cf. 1 Cor. 1:22; 14:22).
2:23. The point of this verse is clear: the Crucifixion was no accident. It was in God’s set purpose (boulē, “plan”) and was God’s determined will, not merely His inclination. It was a divine necessity (cf. 4:28). When Peter referred to you, he meant Jews; and by wicked men he perhaps meant Gentiles because the word “wicked” means lawless (anomōn). Both Gentiles and Jews were implicated in Christ’s death. Many times the apostles accused the Jews of crucifying Jesus (2:23, 36; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 7:52; 10:39; 13:28), though the apostles also held the Gentiles culpable (2:23; 4:27; cf. Luke 23:24–25).
2:24. The resurrection of the Lord is a basic doctrine in Acts (v. 32; 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 33–34, 37; 17:31; 26:23). Here is another indication that He is the Messiah for it was impossible for death to keep its hold on Him (John 20:9).
2:25–35. These verses include four proofs of the Lord’s resurrection and Ascension: (a) The prophecy of Psalm 16:8–11 and the presence of David’s tomb (Acts 2:25–31), (b) the witnesses of the Resurrection (v. 32), (c) the supernatural events of Pentecost (v. 33), and (d) the Ascension of David’s greater Son (Ps. 110:1; Acts 2:34–35).
The word translated grave in verses 27 and 31 is hadēs, which means either the grave (as here) or the underworld of departed spirits.
Peter’s point is that since David, the patriarch and prophet was dead and buried, he could not have been referring to himself in Psalm 16:8–11; hence he was writing about the Christ (“Messiah”) and His resurrection. The oath (Acts 2:30) looks back to Psalm 132:11 (cf. 2 Sam. 7:15–16). God … raised … Jesus to life, and exalted Him (cf. Acts 3:13; Phil. 2:9) to the Father’s right hand (cf. Acts 5:30–31; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22). Thus Jesus had V 2, p 359 the authority to send the promised Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5, 8; John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7), whose presence was evidenced by what they saw (“tongues of fire,” Acts 2:3) and heard (“a violent wind,” v. 2), and the apostles speaking in other languages (vv. 4, 6, 8, 11).
Just as David was not speaking of himself in Psalm 16:8–11, so in Psalm 110:1 he was not speaking of himself. David was not resurrected (Acts 2:29, 31) nor did he ascend to heaven (v. 34). The Lord is Yahweh God who spoke to my (David’s) Lord, who is Christ, God’s Son.
On five occasions in Acts some of the apostles said they were witnesses of the resurrected Christ (v. 32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39–41; 13:30–31). They knew whereof they spoke!
2:36. Here is the conclusion of Peter’s argument. The noun Lord, referring to Christ, probably is a reference to Yahweh. The same word kyrios is used of God in verses 21, 34, and 39 (cf. Phil. 2:9). This is a strong affirmation of Christ’s deity.
2:37. Verses 37–40 contain the application of Peter’s sermon. The verb cut (katenygēsan) means “to strike or prick violently, to stun.” The convicting work of the Spirit (cf. John 16:8–11) in their hearts was great.
Their question had a ring of desperation about it (cf. Acts 16:30). If the Jews had crucified their Messiah and He was now exalted, what was left for them to do? What could and must they do?
2:38–39. Peter’s answer was forthright. First they were to repent. This verb (metanoēsate) means “change your outlook,” or “have a change of heart; reverse the direction of your life.” This obviously results in a change of conduct, but the emphasis is on the mind or outlook. The Jews had rejected Jesus; now they were to trust in Him. Repentance was repeatedly part of the apostles’ message in Acts (v. 38; 3:19; 5:31; 8:22; 11:18; 13:24; 17:30; 19:4; 20:21; 26:20).
A problem revolves around the command “be baptized” and its connection with the remainder of 2:38. There are several views: (1) One is that both repentance and baptism result in remission of sins. In this view, baptism is essential for salvation. The problem with this interpretation is that elsewhere in Scripture forgiveness of sins is based on faith alone (John 3:16, 36; Rom. 4:1–17; 11:6; Gal. 3:8–9; Eph. 2:8–9; etc.). Furthermore Peter, the same speaker, later promised forgiveness of sins on the basis of faith alone (Acts 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18).
(2) A second interpretation translates 2:38, “Be baptized … on the basis of the remission of your sins.” The preposition used here is eis which, with the accusative case, may mean “on account of, on the basis of.” It is used in this way in Matthew 3:11; 12:41; and Mark 1:4. Though it is possible for this construction to mean “on the basis of,” this is not its normal meaning; eis with the accusative case usually describes purpose or direction.
(3) A third view takes the clause and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ as parenthetical. Several factors support this interpretation: (a) The verb makes a distinction between singular and plural verbs and nouns. The verb “repent” is plural and so is the pronoun “your” in the clause so that your sins may be forgiven (lit., “unto the remission of your sins,” eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn hymōn). Therefore the verb “repent” must go with the purpose of forgiveness of sins. On the other hand the imperative “be baptized” is singular, setting it off from the rest of the sentence. (b) This concept fits with Peter’s proclamation in Acts 10:43 in which the same expression “sins may be forgiven” (aphesin hamartiōn) occurs. There it is granted on the basis of faith alone. (c) In Luke 24:47 and Acts 5:31 the same writer, Luke, indicates that repentance results in remission of sins.
The gift of the Holy Spirit is God’s promise (cf. 1:5, 8; 2:33) to those who turn to the Lord, including Jews and their descendants and those who are far off, that is, Gentiles (cf. Eph. 2:13, 17, 19). Acts 2:38–39 put together the human side of salvation (“repent”) and the divine side (call means “to elect”; cf. Rom. 8:28–30).
2:40. Peter’s words in this verse look back to verses 23 and 36. Israel was guilty of a horrendous sin; individual Jews could be spared from God’s judgment on that generation if they would repent (cf. Matt. 21:41–44; 22:7; 23:34–24:2). They would be set apart to Christ and His church if only they would be disassociated from Israel.

V 2, p 360 c. The description of the first church (2:41–47).

2:41. Three thousand who believed were baptized, thus displaying their identification with Christ. This group of people immediately joined the fellowship of believers.
2:42. The activity of this early church was twofold. The believers first continued steadfastly (proskarterountes, “persisting in or continuing in”; cf. 1:14; 2:46; 6:4; 8:13; 10:7; Rom. 12:12; 13:6; Col. 4:2) in the apostles’ teaching or doctrine. The second was fellowship, which is defined as the breaking of bread and … prayer. The omission of “and” between “fellowship” and “to the breaking of bread and to prayer” indicates the last two activities are appositional to fellowship.
Perhaps the breaking of bread included both the Lord’s Table and a common meal (cf. Acts 2:46; 20:7; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:23–25; Jude 12).
2:43. Wonders (terata, “miracles evoking awe”) and miraculous signs (sēmeia, “miracles pointing to a divine truth”) authenticated the veracity of the apostles (cf. 2 Cor. 12:12; Heb. 2:3–4). The apostles performed many such “signs and wonders” (Acts 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 8:6, 13; 14:3; 15:12). Christ too had performed many “wonders” and “signs”—and also “miracles” (dynameis, “works of power”).
2:44–45. The selling of property and the common possession of the proceeds may imply that the early church expected the Lord to return soon and establish His kingdom. This may explain why the practice was not continued. Holding everything in common was not socialism or communism because it was voluntary (cf. 4:32, 34–35; 5:4). Also their goods were not evenly distributed but were given to meet needs as they arose.
2:46–47. The activities described in verses 42–47 would tend to separate the church from traditional Judaism even though every day (cf. v. 47) they continued (proskarterountes; cf. v. 42) to meet together in the temple courts.
One of the subthemes of Acts is joy, because a victorious church is a joyful one. This is seen in verses 46–47 and numerous other times (5:41; 8:8, 39; 11:23; 12:14; 13:48, 52; 14:17; 15:3, 31; 16:34; 21:17). In their fellowship they broke bread in their homes and ate together (cf. 2:42) with joy. (The word praising [ainountes] is used only nine times in the NT, seven of them by Luke: Luke 2:13, 20; 19:37; 24:53; Acts 2:47; 3:8–9; Rom. 15:11; Rev. 19:5).
With the first of seven summary progress reports (cf. Acts 6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:30–31) Luke brought this section of Acts to a close: each day others were being saved. The church grew rapidly right from the start!

John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985).

Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:47 PM 29 May 2014.

Tom Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597345#Comment_597345

Do Logos ever do sales on bronze to silver upgrades? Might it be worth waiting to see if the cost changes? or is it unlikely?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597348#Comment_597348

Do Logos ever do sales on bronze to silver upgrades? Might it be worth waiting to see if the cost changes? or is it unlikely?

Base packages are sometimes reduced by 15% (and upgrades would qualify for the discount). Larger packages are very occasionally discounted at up to 25%. If you google for logos discount code you should easily find a code that will give you a 15% discount.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597337#Comment_597337

But if genuinely all you want are commentaries, then Tyndale+BST is better than NAC+Holman NT (the latter is what you get from Silver).

Just a quick comparison: The Holman excerpt posted above is about 6,500 words, the BKC 2,500 - Stott in BST is about 12,100, so I will give only the beginning (Acts 2:1-13) and the end (Acts 2:40-47) of the passage. If you read it, you'll see the pastoral focus:

2. The Day of Pentecost

2:1–47

Without the Holy Spirit, Christian discipleship would be inconceivable, even impossible. There can be no life without the life-giver, no understanding without the Spirit of truth, no fellowship without the unity of the Spirit, no Christlikeness of character apart from his fruit, and no effective witness without his power. As a body without breath is a corpse, so the church without the Spirit is dead.
Luke is well aware of this. Of the four evangelists it is he who lays the heaviest emphasis on the Spirit. Near the beginning of each part of his two-volume work he demonstrates the indispensability of the Holy Spirit’s enabling. Just as the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus when John baptized him, so that he entered his public ministry ‘full of the Holy Spirit’, ‘led by the Spirit’. ‘in the power of the Spirit’ and ‘anointed’ by the Spirit (Lk. 3:21–22; 4:1, 14, 18), so now the same Spirit came upon the disciples of Jesus to equip them for their mission in the world (Acts 1:5, 8; 2:33). In the early chapters of the Acts Luke refers to the promise, the gift, the baptism, the power and the fullness of the Spirit in the experience of God’s people. The terms are many and interchangeable; the reality is one, and there is no substitute for it.
Yet this reality is multi-faceted, and there are at least four ways in which we may think of the Day of Pentecost. First, it was the final act of the saving ministry of Jesus before the Parousia. He who was born into our humanity, lived our life, died for our sins, rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, now sent his Spirit to his people to constitute them his body and to work out in them what he had won for them. In this sense the Day of Pentecost is unrepeatable. Christmas Day, Good Friday, Easter Day, Ascension Day and Whit Sunday are annual celebrations, but the birth, death, resurrection, ascension and Spirit-gift they commemorate happened once and for all. Secondly, Pentecost brought to the apostles the equipment they needed for their special role. Christ had appointed them to be his primary and authoritative witnesses, and had promised p 61 them the reminding and teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit (John 14–16). Pentecost was the fulfilment of that promise. Thirdly, Pentecost was the inauguration of the new era of the Spirit. Although his coming was a unique and unrepeatable historical event, all the people of God can now always and everywhere benefit from his ministry. Although he equipped the apostles to be the primary witnesses, he also equips us to be secondary witnesses. Although the inspiration of the Spirit was given to the apostles alone, the fullness of the Spirit is for us all. Fourthly, Pentecost has been called—and rightly—the first ‘revival’, using this word to denote one of those altogether unusual visitations of God, in which a whole community becomes vividly aware of his immediate, overpowering presence. It may be, therefore, that not only the physical phenomena (2ff.), but the deep conviction of sin (37), the 3,000 conversions (41) and the widespread sense of awe (43) were signs of ‘revival’. We must be careful, however, not to use this possibility as an excuse to lower our expectations, or to relegate to the category of the exceptional what God may intend to be the church’s normal experience. The wind and the fire were abnormal, and probably the languages too; the new life and joy, fellowship and worship, freedom, boldness and power were not.1
Acts 2 has three sections. It begins with Luke’s description of the Pentecost event itself (1–13), continues with the explanation of the event which Peter gives in his sermon (14–41), and ends with its effects in the life of the Jerusalem church (42–47).

1. Luke’s narrative: the event of Pentecost (2:1–13)

Luke’s narrative opens with a brief, matter-of-fact reference to the time and place of the Spirit’s coming. They were all together in one place, he writes, and is evidently not concerned to enlarge on this. We do not know, therefore, if the ‘house’ of verse 2 is still the upper room (Acts 1:13; 2:46b) or one of the many rooms or halls of the temple (Lk. 24:53; Acts 2:46a). The time is precise, however; it was when the day of Pentecost came (1). This feast had two meanings, one agricultural and the other historical. Originally, it was the middle of the three annual Jewish harvest festivals,2 and p 62 was called either the Feast of Harvest,3 because it celebrated the completion of the grain harvest, or the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost, because it took place seven weeks or fifty days (pentēkostos means ‘fiftieth’) after the Passover, which was when the grain harvesting began.4 Towards the end of the inter-testamental period, however, it began also to be observed as the anniversary of the giving of the law at Mount Sinai, because this was reckoned as having happened fifty days after the Exodus.
It is tempting, therefore, to find the double symbolism of harvesting and law-giving in the Day of Pentecost. Certainly there was a great harvest of 3,000 souls that day, the first-fruits of the Christian mission. As Chrysostom put it, ‘the time was come to put in the sickle of the word; for here, as the sickle, keen-edged, came the Spirit down’.5 Certainly too the prophets regarded as almost identical Yahweh’s two New Covenant promises, ‘I will put my Spirit in you’6 and ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts’,7 since what the Spirit does when he enters our hearts is to write God’s law there, as Paul clearly taught. Nevertheless, Luke does not draw out this double symbolism. So we cannot be sure whether it was important to him, even though Jewish tradition associated wind, fire and voices with Mount Sinai,8 the three phenomena which he is about to describe.

a. The three phenomena

Suddenly, Luke says, the great event took place. The Spirit of God came upon them. And his coming was accompanied by three supernatural signs—a sound, a sight and strange speech. First, there came from heaven a sound like the blowing of a violent wind, and it (i.e. the noise) filled the whole house where they were sitting (2). Secondly, there appeared to them visibly what seemed to be tongues of fire, which separated and came to rest on each of them (3), becoming for each an individual possession. Thirdly, all of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues (i.e. languages of some kind) as the Spirit enabled them (4).
These three experiences seemed like natural phenomena (wind, fire and speech); yet they were supernatural both in origin and in character. The noise was not wind, but sounded like it; the sight was not fire but resembled it; and the speech was in languages which were not ordinary but in some way ‘other’. Again, three of their higher senses were affected, in that they heard the wind-like sound, saw the fire-like apparition and spoke the ‘other’ languages. Yet what they experienced was more than sensory; it was significant. p 63 So they sought to understand it. ‘What does this mean?’ the people later asked (12). If we allow other parts of Scripture to guide our interpretation, it seems that these three signs at least represented the new era of the Spirit which had begun (John the Baptist had bracketed wind and fire9) and the new work which he had come to do. If so, the noise like wind may have symbolized power (such as Jesus had promised them for witness, Lk. 24:49; Acts 1:8), the sight like fire purity (like the live coal which cleansed Isaiah, 6:6–7) and the speech in other languages the universality of the Christian church. In what follows nothing more is said about the phenomena like wind and fire; Luke concentrates on the third, the languages.

5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven, 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: ‘Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?’

Luke’s emphasis is on the international nature of the crowd which collected. They were all God-fearing Jews, and they were all staying (that is, residing) in Jerusalem (5). Yet they had not been born there; they came from the dispersion, from every nation under heaven (5). That we must not press Luke’s ‘every nation’ literally to include, for example, American Indians, Australian aboriginals and New Zealand Maoris, is plain from what follows. He was speaking, as the biblical writers normally did, from his own horizon not ours, and was referring to the Graeco-Roman world situated round the Mediterranean basin, indeed to every nation in which there were Jews.
Luke’s list comprises five groupings, as he moves with his mind’s eye approximately from East to West. First, he mentions Parthians, Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia (9a), that is, peoples from the Caspian Sea westwards, many of whom will have been descended from the Jewish exiles who had been transported there in the eighth and sixth centuries BC. Secondly, in verses 9b–10a, Luke refers to five areas of what we call Asia Minor or Turkey, namely Cappadocia (east), Pontus (north), and Asia (west), Phrygia and Pamphylia (south). Because Judea (9) comes oddly between Mesopotamia and Cappadocia, some commentators think Luke is using the word to refer to a wider area like the whole of Palestine and Syria, even including Armenia, while others follow an Old Latin version which reads Joudaioi (‘Jews’) instead of Joudaian (‘Judea’), and so translate ‘the Jews inhabiting Mesopotamia and p 64 Cappadocia etc.’. The third group (10b) is North African, namely Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene (its chief city), the fourth (10c–11a) is visitors from Rome across the Mediterranean (both Jews and converts to Judaism), and the fifth, which looks like an afterthought, is Cretans and Arabs (11b).10

The Near East in the first century AD

This was the international, multi-lingual crowd which gathered round the 120 believers. We hear them declaring the wonders of God, they said, in our own tongues (11c), that is, each … in his own native language (8). Yet the speakers were known to be Galileans (7), who had a reputation for being uncultured.11 They also ‘had difficulty pronouncing gutturals and had the habit of swallowing syllables when speaking; so they were looked down upon by the people of Jerusalem as being provincial’.12 It is not surprising, therefore, that the crowd’s reaction was one of bewilderment (6). Indeed, amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, ‘What does this mean?’ (12). Some, however, a minority who for some reason understood none of the languages, made fun of them and said, ‘They have had too much wine’ (13).

b. Glossolalia

What exactly was this third phenomenon which Luke stresses, and as a result of which people heard God’s wonders in their vernacular? How does Luke understand glossolalia? We begin our answer negatively.
First, it was not the result of intoxication, of drinking too much gleukos, ‘sweet new wine’ (13, BAGD). Peter is emphatic on this point: ‘These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning!’ (15). As early in the day as that, Haenchen comments, ‘even drunkards and wassailers have not yet begun to imbibe’.13 Besides, the Jews fasted during festivals until the morning services were over. Nor, we must add, did the believers’ experience of the Spirit’s fullness seem to them or look to others like intoxication, because they had lost control of their normal mental and physical functions. No, the fruit of the Spirit is ‘self-control’,14 not the loss of it. Besides, only ‘some’ (13) made this remark, and though they said it, they do not seem to have meant it. For, Luke p 66 says, they ‘made fun of them’. It was more a jest than a serious comment.
Secondly, it was not a mistake or a miracle of hearing, in contrast to speaking, so that the audience supposed that the believers spoke in other languages when they did not.15 Some of Luke’s statements seem to support this theory: ‘each one heard them speaking in his own language’ (6); ‘how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?’ (8); and ‘we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!’ (11). When, however, Luke writes his own descriptive narrative, he puts the matter beyond dispute: they ‘began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them’, (4). Glossolalia was indeed a phenomenon of hearing, but only because it was first a phenomenon of speech.
Thirdly, it was not a case of incoherent utterance. Liberal commentators, who begin with a prejudice against miracles, suggest that the 120 believers broke into unintelligible, ecstatic speech, and that Luke (who had visited Corinth with Paul) mistakenly supposed that it was literal languages. Thus Luke got in a muddle and confused two quite different things. What he thought was languages was in reality ‘inarticulate ecstatic babbling’16 or ‘a flood of unintelligible sounds in no known language’.17 Those of us who have confidence in Luke as a reliable historian, however, let alone as an inspired contributor to the New Testament, conclude that it is not he who is mistaken, but rather his rationalistic interpreters.
Fourthly, and positively, the glossolalia on the Day of Pentecost was a supernatural ability to speak in recognizable languages. Some think that these were Aramaic, Greek and Latin, which would all have been spoken in multi-lingual Galilee; that ‘other languages’ means ‘languages other than Hebrew’ (the sacred biblical language which would have seemed appropriate to the occasion); and that the crowd’s astonishment was aroused by God’s wonders not the languages, by the content not the medium of the communication. This is plausible, and could be said to do justice to Luke’s account. On the other hand, his emphasis is more on the linguistic media (4, 6, 8, 11) than on the message (12); it is natural to translate ‘other languages’ as ‘other than their mother tongue’ rather than ‘other than Hebrew’; the list of fifteen regions in verses 9–11 leads one to expect a wider range of languages than Aramaic, Greek and Latin; and the crowd’s astonishment seems due to the fact that the languages, which to the speakers were ‘other’ (4), i.e. foreign, were yet to the hearers their ‘own’ (6, 11), indeed their ‘own native language’ (8), in which they were born (see AV). I conclude, therefore, p 67 that the miracle of Pentecost, although it may have included the substance of what the one hundred and twenty spoke (the wonders of God), was primarily the medium of their speech (foreign languages they had never learned).
So far I have concentrated on Luke’s own understanding of glossolalia on the Day of Pentecost, which can be discovered only by the exegesis of Acts 2. Presumably, the glossolalia to which he refers in Acts 10:46 and 19:6 was the same speaking of foreign languages, since he uses the same vocabulary (though most manuscripts omit the adjective ‘other’). What, then, about the references to tongue-speaking in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14? Are the phenomena mentioned in Acts and 1 Corinthians the same or different? We must try to reach our answer with reference to the biblical text rather than to contemporary claims.
Some think the phenomena were in several ways different. First, they were different in direction, glossolalia in Acts being in some sense the public ‘declaring’ (11) of God’s wonders, sharing them with others, while in 1 Corinthians the tongue-speaker ‘does not speak to men but to God’.18 Secondly, they were different in character, glossolalia in Acts being languages which were understood by groups of listeners, while in 1 Corinthians 14 the speech was unintelligible and an interpreter was necessary. Thirdly, they were different in purpose. In Acts glossolalia seems to be evidential, an initial ‘sign’ given to all, bearing witness to their reception of the Spirit, while in 1 Corinthians it is edificatory, a continuing ‘gift’ bestowed on some for the building up of the church.
Others, however, point out that the Greek words and expressions are the same throughout the New Testament. Glōssa (‘tongue’) has only two meanings (the organ in the mouth and a language) and hermēneuō (‘interpret’) usually means to translate a language. They therefore conclude that the Acts and 1 Corinthians passages refer to the same thing, namely languages. Even some who think the purpose is different, go on to affirm that the character is the same. For example, the Assemblies of God commentator Stanley M. Horton writes that ‘the tongues here (sc. in Acts 2) and the tongues in 1 Corinthians chapters 12–14 are the same’.19 As the official Statement of the Assemblies of God puts it (para. 8), they are ‘the same in essence’, but ‘different in purpose and use’. To sum up, rejecting the liberal approach, which is to declare Corinthian glossolalia to be unintelligible utterance and to assimilate the Acts phenomenon to it, it is better to make the opposite proposal, namely that the Acts phenomenon was intelligible languages and that the 1 Corinthians experience must be assimilated to it. The p 68 main argument for this is that, although glossolalia is mentioned without explanation in several New Testament passages, Acts 2 is the only passage in which it is described and explained; it seems more reasonable to interpret the unexplained in the light of the explained than vice versa.20
Discussion about the nature of glossolalia must not distract our attention from Luke’s understanding of its significance on the Day of Pentecost. It symbolized a new unity in the Spirit transcending racial, national and linguistic barriers. So Luke is at pains to emphasize the cosmopolitan character of the crowd, not least by the expression ‘from every nation under heaven’ (5). Although all the nations of the world were not present literally, they were representatively. For Luke includes in his list descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth, and gives us in Acts 2 a ‘Table of the Nations’ comparable to the one in Genesis 10. Bishop Stephen Neill has made this point: ‘Most of the peoples mentioned by Luke fall under the heading of the Semites, Elam being the first of the Semitic nations mentioned in Genesis 10; but Luke is careful also to add Egypt and Libya which come under the heading of the Hamites, and Cretans (Kittim) and dwellers in Rome who belong to the section under Japheth.… Luke does not draw attention to what he is doing; but in his own subtle way he is saying to us that on that Day of Pentecost the whole world was there in the representatives of the various nations.’21
Nothing could have demonstrated more clearly than this the multi-racial, multi-national, multi-lingual nature of the kingdom of Christ. Ever since the early church fathers, commentators have seen the blessing of Pentecost as a deliberate and dramatic reversal of the curse of Babel. At Babel human languages were confused and the nations were scattered; in Jerusalem the language barrier was supernaturally overcome as a sign that the nations would now be gathered together in Christ, prefiguring the great day when the redeemed company will be drawn ‘from every nation, tribe, people and language’.22 Besides, at Babel earth proudly tried to ascend to heaven, whereas in Jerusalem heaven humbly descended to earth.

John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts: The Spirit, the Church & the World, The Bible Speaks Today (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 60–68.

(vi) His new community (2:40–41)
Luke adds that this was not the end of Peter’s sermon, for with many other words he both warned them and pleaded with them. And the essence of his warnings and pleadings was the appeal: ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation’ (40). That is, Peter was not asking for private and individual conversions only, but for p 79 a public identification with other believers. Commitment to the Messiah implied commitment to the Messianic community, that is, the church. Indeed, they would have to change communities, transferring their membership from one that was old and corrupt to one that was new and being saved (47).
The amazing response to Peter’s appeal is now recorded. Large numbers of people accepted his message (i.e. repented and believed), and in consequence were baptised. In fact, about three thousand were added to their number that day (41). The body of Christ in Jerusalem multiplied twenty-six times, from 120 to 3,120. They must also, according to Peter’s promise, have received forgiveness and the Spirit, although this time apparently with no supernatural signs. At least Luke makes no mention of phenomena like wind or fire, or of languages.

d. The gospel for today

We have seen that Peter focused on Christ and told his story in six stages. (i) He was a man, though divinely attested by miracles; (ii) he was put to death by wicked hands, though according to God’s purpose; (iii) he was raised from the dead, as the prophets had foretold and the apostles had witnessed; (iv) he was exalted to God’s right hand, and from there poured out the Spirit; (v) he now gives forgiveness and the Spirit to all who repent, believe and are baptized; and (vi) he thus adds them to his new community.
Numerous reconstructions of this material have been attempted. Special mention must be made of C. H. Dodd’s famous lectures at King’s College, London, on the kerygma of Peter and Paul, and their coincidence, which were published under the title The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments.53 He summarized the sermons of Peter as follows: (i) the age of fulfilment, the Messianic age, has dawned; (ii) this has happened through the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, as testified by the Scriptures; (iii) Jesus has been exalted to God’s right hand as Lord, and as head of the New Israel; (iv) the Holy Spirit’s activity in the church is the sign of Christ’s present power and glory; (v) the Messianic age will shortly reach its consummation in the return of Christ; and (vi) forgiveness and the Spirit are offered to those who repent.54
Our struggle today is how to be faithful to this apostolic gospel, while at the same time presenting it in a way which resonates with modern men and women. What is immediately clear is that, like the apostles, we must focus on Jesus Christ. Peter’s beginning p 80 ‘listen to this: Jesus …’ (22) must be our beginning too. It is impossible to preach the gospel without proclaiming Christ. But how? I have myself found it an aid to faithfulness to express the apostles’ message in the following framework:
First, the gospel events, namely the death and resurrection of Jesus. It is true that Peter referred to Jesus’ life and ministry (22) and went on to his exaltation (33), and elsewhere to his return as judge. The apostles felt free to rehearse his whole saving career. Yet they concentrated on the cross and the resurrection (23–24), both as historical happenings and as significant saving events. Although a full doctrine of the atonement is not yet developed, it is already implied by the references to God’s purpose (23), to the suffering servant passages (3:13, 18), and to the ‘tree’, the place of the divine curse (5:30; 10:39; 13:29).55 The resurrection had saving significance too, since by it God reversed the human verdict on Jesus, snatched him from the place of a curse and exalted him to the place of honour.
Secondly, the gospel witnesses. The apostles did not proclaim the death and resurrection of Jesus in a vacuum, but in the context of Scripture and history. They appealed to a twofold evidence to authenticate Jesus, so that in the mouth of two witnesses the truth might be established. The first was the Old Testament Scriptures, which he fulfilled. In Acts 2 Peter appeals to Psalm 16, Psalm 110 and Joel 2 in order to illuminate his teaching about Jesus’ resurrection, exaltation and gift of the Spirit. The second was the testimony of the apostles. ‘We are witnesses’, Peter kept repeating (e.g. 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39ff.), and this eyewitness experience was indispensable to the apostolate. Thus the one Christ has a double attestation. We have no liberty to preach a Christ of our own fantasy, or even to focus on our own experience, since we were not eyewitnesses of the historical Jesus. Our responsibility is to preach the authentic Christ of the Old and New Testament Scriptures. The primary witnesses to him are the prophets and apostles; ours is always secondary to theirs.
Thirdly, the gospel promises. The gospel is good news not only of what Jesus did (he died for our sins and was raised, according to the Scriptures) but also of what he offers as a result. He promises to those who respond to him both the forgiveness of sins (to wipe out the past) and the gift of the Spirit (to make us new people). Together these constitute the freedom for which many are searching, freedom from guilt, defilement, judgment and self-centredness, and freedom to be the persons God made and meant us to be. Forgiveness and the Spirit comprise ‘salvation’, and both are publicly p 81 signified in baptism, namely the washing away of sin and the outpouring of the Spirit.
Fourthly, the gospel conditions. Jesus Christ does not impose his gifts upon us unconditionally. What the gospel demands is a radical turn from sin to Christ, which takes the form inwardly of repentance and faith, and outwardly of baptism. For submission to baptism in the name of the Christ we have formerly repudiated gives public evidence of penitent faith in him. Additionally, by this same repentance, faith and baptism we change allegiance, as we are transferred into the new community of Jesus.
Here, then is a fourfold message—two events (Christ’s death and resurrection), as attested by two witnesses (prophets and apostles), on the basis of which God makes two promises (forgiveness and the Spirit), on two conditions (repentance and faith, with baptism). We have no liberty to amputate this apostolic gospel, by proclaiming the cross without the resurrection, or referring to the New Testament but not the Old, or offering forgiveness without the Spirit, or demanding faith without repentance. There is a wholeness about the biblical gospel.
It is not enough to ‘proclaim Jesus’. For there are many different Jesuses being presented today. According to the New Testament gospel, however, he is historical (he really lived, died rose and ascended in the arena of history), theological (his life, death, resurrection and ascension all have saving significance) and contemporary (he lives and reigns to bestow salvation on those who respond to him). Thus the apostles told the same story of Jesus at three levels—as historical event (witnessed by their own eyes), as having theological significance (interpreted by the Scriptures), and as contemporary message (confronting men and women with the necessity of decision). We have the same responsibility today to tell the story of Jesus as fact, doctrine and gospel.

3. The church’s life: the effect of Pentecost (2:42–47)

Having first described in his own narrative what happened on the day of Pentecost, and then supplied an explanation of it through Peter’s Christ-centred sermon, Luke goes on to show us the effects of Pentecost by giving us a beautiful little cameo of the Spirit-filled church. Of course the church did not begin that day, and it is incorrect to call the Day of Pentecost ‘the birthday of the church’. For the church as the people of God goes back at least 4,000 years to Abraham. What happened at Pentecost was that the remnant of God’s people became the Spirit-filled body of Christ. What evidence did it give of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit? Luke tells us.

p 82 a. It was a learning church

The very first evidence Luke mentions of the Spirit’s presence in the church is that they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching. One might perhaps say that the Holy Spirit opened a school in Jerusalem that day; its teachers were the apostles whom Jesus had appointed; and there were 3,000 pupils in the kindergarten! We note that those new converts were not enjoying a mystical experience which led them to despise their mind or disdain theology. Anti-intellectualism and the fullness of the Spirit are mutually incompatible, because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth. Nor did those early disciples imagine that, because they had received the Spirit, he was the only teacher they needed and they could dispense with human teachers. On the contrary, they sat at the apostles’ feet, hungry to receive instruction, and they persevered in it. Moreover, the teaching authority of the apostles, to which they submitted, was authenticated by miracles: many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles (43). The two references to the apostles, in verse 42 (their teaching) and in verse 43 (their miracles), can hardly be an accident.56 Since the teaching of the apostles has come down to us in its definitive form in the New Testament, contemporary devotion to the apostles’ teaching will mean submission to the authority of the New Testament. A Spirit-filled church is a New Testament church, in the sense that it studies and submits to New Testament instruction. The Spirit of God leads the people of God to submit to the Word of God.

b. It was a loving church

They devoted themselves … to the fellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia (from koinos, ‘common’) bears witness to the common life of the church in two sense. First, it expresses what we share in together. This is God himself, for ‘our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ’,57 and there is ‘the fellowship of the p 83 Holy Spirit’.58 Thus koinōnia is a Trinitarian experience; it is our common share in God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But secondly, koinōnia also expresses what we share out together, what we give as well as what we receive. Koinōnia is the word Paul used for the collection he was organizing among the Greek churches,59 and koinonikos is the Greek word for ‘generous’. It is to this that Luke is particularly referring here, because he goes on at once to describe the way in which these first Christians shared their possessions with one another: all the believers were together and had everything in common (koina). Selling their possessions and goods (probably meaning their real estate and their valuables respectively), they gave to anyone as he had need (44–45). These are disturbing verses. Do they mean that every Spirit-filled believer and community will follow their example literally?
A few miles east of Jerusalem the Essene leaders of the Qumran community were committed to the common ownership of property. According to its Damascus Rule all members of ‘the covenant’, wherever they lived, were obliged to ‘succour the poor, the needy, and the stranger’,60 but the candidate for initiation into membership of the monastic community accepted a stricter discipline: ‘his property and earnings shall be handed over to the Bursar of the Congregation …; his property shall be merged …’.61 This arrangement, comments Geza Vermes, ‘bears a close resemblance to the custom adopted by the primitive Church of Jerusalem’.62
So did the early Christians imitate them, and should we do so today? At different times in church history some have thought so and done so. And I do not doubt that Jesus still calls some of his disciples, as he did the rich young ruler, to a life of total, voluntary poverty. Yet neither Jesus nor his apostles forbade private property to all Christians. Even the sixteenth-century Anabaptists in the so-called ‘radical reformation’, who wanted fellowship and brotherly love to be added to the Reformers’ definition of the church (in terms of word, sacraments and discipline), and who talked much about Acts 2 and 4 and ‘the community of goods’, recognized that this was not compulsory. The Hutterite Brethren in Moravia seem to have been the only exception, for they did make complete common ownership a condition of membership. But Menno Simons, the most influential leader of the movement, pointed out that Jerusalem experiment was neither universal nor permanent, and wrote ‘we … have never taught nor practised community of goods’.63
p 84 It is important to note that even in Jerusalem the sharing of property and possessions was voluntary. According to verse 46, they broke bread in their homes. So evidently many still had homes; not all had sold them. It is also noteworthy that the tense of both verbs in verse 45 is imperfect, which indicates that the selling and the giving were occasional, in response to particular needs, not once and for all. Further, the sin of Ananias and Sapphira, to which we shall come in Acts 5, was not greed or materialism but deceit; it was not that they had retained part of the proceeds of their sale, but that they had done so while pretending to give it all. Peter made this plain when he said to them: ‘Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal?’ (5:4).
At the same time, although the selling and the sharing were and are voluntary, and every Christian has to make conscientious decisions before God in this matter, we are all called to generosity, especially towards the poor and needy. Already in the Old Testament there was a strong tradition of care for the poor, and the Israelites were to give a tenth of their produce to ‘the Levite, the alien, the fatherless and the widow’.64 How can Spirit-filled believers possibly give less? The principle is stated twice in the Acts: they gave to anyone as he had need (45), and ‘there were no needy persons among them … the money … was distributed to anyone as he had need’ (4:34–35). As John was to write later, if we have material possessions and see a brother or sister in need, but do not share what we have with him or her, how can we claim that God’s love dwells in us?65 Christian fellowship is Christian caring, and Christian caring is Christian sharing. Chrysostom gave a beautiful description of it: ‘This was an angelic commonwealth, not to call anything of theirs their own. Forthwith the root of evils was cut out.… None reproached, none envied, none grudged; no pride, no contempt was there.… The poor man knew no shame, the rich no haughtiness.’66 So we must not evade the challenge of these verses. That we have hundreds of thousands of destitute brothers and sisters is a standing rebuke to us who are more affluent. It is part of the responsibility of Spirit-filled believers to alleviate need and abolish destitution in the new community of Jesus.

c. It was a worshipping church

They devoted themselves … to the breaking of bread and to prayer (42). That is, their fellowship was expressed not only in caring for each other, but in corporate worship too. Moreover, the definite article in both expressions (literally, ‘the breaking of the bread and p 85 the prayers’) suggests a reference to the Lord’s Supper on the one hand (although almost certainly at that early stage as part of a larger meal) and prayer services or meetings (rather than Private prayer) on the other. There are two aspects of the early church’s worship which exemplify its balance.
First, it was both formal and informal, for it took place both in the temple courts and in their homes (46), which is an interesting combination. It is perhaps surprising that they continued for a while in the temple, but they did. They did not immediately abandon what might be called the institutional church. I do not believe they still participated in the sacrifices of the temple, for already they had begun to grasp that these had been fulfilled in the sacrifice of Christ, but they do seem to have attended the prayer services of the temple (cf. 3:1), unless, as has been suggested, they went up to the temple to preach, rather than to pray. At the same time, they supplemented the temple services with more informal and spontaneous meetings (including the breaking of bread) in their homes. Perhaps we, who get understandably impatient with the inherited structures of the church, can learn a lesson from them. For myself, I believe that the Holy Spirit’s way with the institutional church, which we long to see reformed according to the gospel, is more the way of patient reform than of impatient rejection. And certainly it is always healthy when the more formal and dignified services of the local church are complemented with the informality and exuberance of home meetings. There is no need to polarize between the structured and the unstructured, the traditional and the spontaneous. The church needs both.
The second example of the balance of the early church’s worship is that it was both joyful and reverent. There can be no doubt of their joy, for they are described as having glad and sincere hearts (46), which literally means ‘in exultation [agalliasis] and sincerity of heart’. The NEB unites the two words by translating ‘with unaffected joy’. Since God had sent his son into the world, and had now sent them his Spirit, they had plenty of reason to be joyful. Besides, ‘the fruit of the Spirit is … joy’,67 and sometimes a more uninhibited joy than is customary (or even acceptable) within the staid traditions of the historic churches. Yet every worship service should be a joyful celebration of the mighty acts of God through Jesus Christ. It is right in public worship to be dignified; it is unforgivable to be dull. At the same time, their joy was never irreverent. If joy in God is an authentic work of the Spirit, so is the fear of God. Everyone was filled with awe (43), which seems to include the Christians as well as the non-Christians. God had p 86 visited their city. He was in their midst, and they knew it. They bowed down before him in humility and wonder. It is a mistake, therefore, to imagine that in public worship reverence and rejoicing are mutually exclusive. The combination of joy and awe, as of formality and informality, is a healthy balance in worship.

d. It was an evangelistic church

So far we have considered the study, the fellowship and the worship of the Jerusalem church, for it is to these three things that Luke says the first believers devoted themselves. Yet these are aspects of the interior life of the church; they tell us nothing about its compassionate outreach to the world. Tens of thousands of sermons have been preached on Acts 2:42, which well illustrates the danger of isolating a text from its context. On its own, verse 42 presents a very lopsided picture of the church’s life. Verse 47b needs to be added: And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. Those first Jerusalem Christians were not so preoccupied with learning, sharing and worshipping, that they forgot about witnessing. For the Holy Spirit is a missionary Spirit who created a missionary church. As Harry Boer expressed it in his challenging book Pentecost and Missions,68 the Acts ‘is governed by one dominant, overriding and all-controlling motif. This motif is the expansion of the faith through missionary witness in the power of the Spirit.… Restlessly the Spirit drives the church to witness, and continually churches rise out of the witness. The church is a missionary church’.69
From these earliest believers in Jerusalem, we can learn three vital lessons about local church evangelism. First, the Lord himself (that is, Jesus) did it: the Lord added to their number. Doubtless he did it through the preaching of the apostles, the witness of church members, the impressive love of their common life, and their example as they were praising God and enjoying the favour of all the people (47a). Yet he did it. For he is the head of the church. He alone has the prerogative to admit people into its membership and to bestow salvation from his throne. This is a much needed emphasis, for many people talk about evangelism today with reprehensible self-confidence and even triumphalism, as if they think the evangelization of the world will be the ultimate triumph of human technology. We should harness to the evangelistic task all the technology God has give us, but only in humble dependence on him as the principal evangelist.
Secondly, what Jesus did was two things together: he added to p 87 their number … those who were being saved (the present participle sōzomenous either being timeless or emphasizing that salvation is a progressive experience culminating in final glorification). He did not add them to the church without saving them (no nominal Christianity at the beginning), nor did he save them without adding them to the church (no solitary Christianity either). Salvation and church membership belonged together; they still do. Thirdly, the Lord added people daily. The verb is an imperfect (‘kept adding’), and the adverb (‘daily’) puts the matter beyond question. The early church’s evangelism was not an occasional or sporadic activity. They did not organize quinquennial or decennial missions (missions are fine so long as they are only episodes in an ongoing programme). No, just as their worship was daily (46a), so was their witness. Praise and proclamation were both the natural overflow of hearts full of the Holy spirit. And as their outreach was continuous, so continuously converts were being added. We need to recover this expectation of steady and uninterrupted church growth.
Looking back over these marks of the first Spirit-filled community, it is evident that they all concerned the church’s relationships. First, they were related to the apostles (in submission). They were eager to receive the apostles’ instruction. A Spirit-filled church is an apostolic church, a New Testament church, anxious to believe and obey what Jesus and his apostles taught. Secondly, they were related to each other (in love). They persevered in the fellowship, supporting each other and relieving the needs of the poor. A Spirit-filled church is a loving, caring, sharing church. Thirdly, they were related to God (in worship). They worshipped him in the temple and in the home, in the Lord’s Supper and in the prayers, with joy and with reverence. A Spirit-filled church is a worshipping church. Fourthly, they were related to the world (in outreach). They were engaged in continuous evangelism. No self-centred, self-contained church (absorbed in its own parochial affairs) can claim to be filled with the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is a missionary Spirit. So a Spirit-filled church is a missionary church.
There is no need for us to wait, as the hundred and twenty had to wait, for the Spirit to come. For the Holy Spirit did come on the Day of Pentecost, and has never left his church. Our responsibility is to humble ourselves before his sovereign authority, to determiner not to quench him, but to allow him his freedom. For then our churches will again manifest those marks of the Spirit’s presence, which many young people are specially looking for, namely biblical teaching, loving fellowship, living worship, and an ongoing, outgoing evangelism.

John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts: The Spirit, the Church & the World, The Bible Speaks Today (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 78–87.

DAL

Upgrade and then ask for the special "one time discount" on the Tyndale Commentaries (OT & NT) that way you can have the best of both worlds; i.e. lots of extras and solid scholarship contained in the Tyndale Commentaries. If you don't really want to spend much, then EBC is still a good option, but trust me, with the special discount you won't spend that much extra to get the Tyndale set and hey, you might even have some money left for EBC.

Make sure you ask and if you already upgraded, then call and ask again. You have about 10 days to take advantage of those special discounts. Usually they only offer the topical bundles at 50% off, but they also do Tyndale and others, you just have to inquire about them. I did this about a couple of weeks ago, since I've been doing a lot of upgrades with the new base packages. I just did another upgrade today, so I will call to get the list of other items I might get at a special discount on. I'm thinking AYB Dictionary among others who are discounted.

DAL

Edit: After reading the Bible Speaks Today sample, I will call sales and ask them to do the one time discount on it. This set was one of the few discounted after an upgrade. I believe they were letting it go for 59 after an upgrade. Very useful especially since I'm also teaching Acts and will start chapter 2 this coming Sunday! Awesome little set!

DAL

All I can say is "awesome discount!" on the Bible Speaks Today set. So don't forget to ask for the discount on selected resources when you upgrade. I just wish we had the Old Testament set for this series (BST).

DAL

Tom Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597350#Comment_597350

Hi, I am thinking of going for an upgrade to silver, and I have been looking for a discount code. I have found a few, but when I try to apply them to the upgrade cost at the checkout nothing happens, and no upgrade is applied.

Any advice on this anyone?

Tom

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598083#Comment_598083

Tom, I would get in touch with sales and see what they can do. I've always found them very helpful!

Dan Francis

I am not Methodist but I would guess you would benefit more from the scholarship of commentaries from your triton more than the upgrade. I have found the New Beacon Bible Commentary (NBBC) (19 vols.) to be useful (although occasionally too Wesleyan in it's approach for me but very understandable and a nice change from rampant calvinism of many scholars). Also the ecumenical New Interpreter’s Bible (12 vols.) should be out within a couple months and i tend to find it the best commentary out there. I have NAC in other software and I am not overly impressed with it, finding Word Biblical Commentary (WBC) superior to it in every way.

-Dan

Milkman

Always go for the things you really want. So go commentaries.

Hi, I was just looking for opinions on something's. I am a Methodist Local Preacher, and I have the bronze base package of Logos 5. I am wanting to invest some money and am considering either upgrading to silver or buying separate commentaries. It's the commentaries I am really after, and I was wondering for the ~£200 it would cost to upgrade, would you spend the money on an upgrade or maybe on commentaries and/or using community pricing etc.

thanks in advance

Tom

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/597355#Comment_597355

@NB & Kelvin

Those are pretty big replys [O] yikes!

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598136#Comment_598136

1581.samples.pdf

Samples of Luke 8:1-3 in NBBC, NIB, WBC.

-Dan