the reformed theological review

THE REFORMED THEOLOGICAL REVIEW Vol. 75

December 2016

No. 3

The City in Acts: The Relevance of Paul’s Urban Mission for Luke’s Purpose 1. Introduction and Literature Review

Two recent books by pastors involved in the Redeemer City to City 1 church planting network, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centred Ministry in Your City, 2 by Timothy Keller, and Why Cities Matter: To God, the Culture, and the Church, 3 by Stephen T. Um and Justin Buzzard, promote a vision for city-focused church planting and ministry, emphasising the strategic nature of such ministry. 4 They argue that Paul’s ministry, as it is recorded in The Acts of the Apostles, reveals a distinct urban missionary strategy. Keller presents Paul as strategically targeting the cities of the Roman Empire. 5 Citing Paul’s ministry in Redeemer City to City, About—Redeemer City to City, http://www.redeemercitytocity.com/about, 25 September 2014. 2 Timothy Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012). 3 Stephen T. Um and Justin Buzzard, Why Cities Matter: To God, the Culture, and the Church (Wheaton: Crossway, 2013). 4 Keller, Center Church, 166; Um and Buzzard, Why Cities Matter, 29. 5 Keller, Center Church, 148. 1

146

The City in Acts: The Relevance of Paul’s Urban Mission for Luke’s Purpose

Ephesus (Acts 19), which Luke notes ‘continued for two years, so that all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greek’ (Acts 19:10), he argues, ‘Paul and other Christian missionaries went to great cities because when Christianity was planted there, it spread regionally…it also spread globally…and finally it more readily affected the culture.’ 6 Um and Buzzard even more forcefully assert Paul’s urban strategy. For example: Of all the cities Paul saw, of all the churches he planted, he is set on personally bringing the gospel to the most influential city in the world. Facing personal opposition, imprisonment, shipwreck, and more, Paul did not quit until he arrived in Rome. And once in Rome, Paul stayed in the city: his mission had reached its goal. 7

That Paul’s missionary strategy was to evangelise and establish churches in important urban centres is certainly the consensus of most scholars writing on this issue. 8 One voice pressing back against this majority, however, is that of Eckhard Schnabel, who notes that: (i) neither Luke nor Paul explicitly comment on how Paul selected the cities where he preached the news of Jesus Christ; 9 (ii) Paul’s selection of cities and towns lacks uniformity, so ‘it is a significant overstatement to say Keller, Center Church, 154. While Paul’s ministry in Ephesus could be a picture of the potential of urban focused mission strategies, Luke does not give any detail regarding how the word spread from the city into the whole province. Also, this wide success is in the context of a powerful work of God unparalleled anywhere else in Acts except, perhaps, Pentecost, as evidenced by the ‘extraordinary miracles’ (Acts 19:11) and the dramatic social, religious and economic upheaval resulting from life-changing conversions (19:23–27). 7 Um and Buzzard, Why Cities Matter, 75. 8 Harvie M. Conn and Manuel Ortiz, Urban Ministry: The Kingdom, the City, & the People of God (Downers Grove: IVP, 2001), 128; Roger S. Greenway, ‘Success in the City: Paul's Urban Mission Strategy: Acts 14:1–28’, Mission in Acts: Ancient Narratives in Contemporary Context, eds Robert L. and Paul Hertig Gallagher (Maryknoll: Orbis, 2004), 189; Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 9–10. 9 Eckhard J. Schnabel, Paul the Missionary: Realities, Strategies and Methods (Downers Grove: IVP, 2008), 258. 6

The Reformed Theological Review 75:3 (December 2016)

147

that Paul’s passion was the planting of churches in metropolitan centers or in the “strategic cities” of the Roman Empire’; 10 and (iii) that passages such as Acts 14:6–7 and Acts 26:20 reveal Luke’s awareness of Paul’s ministry outside of cities. 11 What has not been much focused on in this debate is how Luke’s inclusion of urban material relates to his purposes in writing Acts. Much of the secondary literature conflates the historical missionary strategy of Paul with the place of the city within Luke’s themes and narrative purposes. For example, Um and Buzzard argue that ‘the book of Acts is a story about the geographic expansion of the gospel through cities.’ 12 It is true that Paul’s historical mission and Luke’s record of it are closely linked; much of our knowledge of Paul’s mission comes through Luke’s account in Acts. However, if an appeal is to be made to the Paul of the Acts of the Apostles (as distinct, say, from the Paul of the epistles or the historical Paul as reconstructed in modern scholarship) as a normative example of Christian mission, there must be some recognition of Luke’s authorial choices and Paul’s function as a character in Luke’s narrative. While it is undeniable that cities feature heavily in the narrative of Acts, it is necessary to ascertain whether Luke’s selection and presentation of the ministry in these cities supports the claims that urban ministry practitioners such as Keller and Um and Buzzard are making. This paper aims to test the validity of some of these claims by exploring Luke’s purposes in Acts, and how his treatment of the cities in which Paul ministers relates to these ends. First, Luke’s purposes will be explored through an exegesis of Luke 1:1–4 and Acts 1:1–11,13 and then a case study will provide focused exegesis of Luke’s accounts of Paul’s Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 281. Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 285. 12 Um and Buzzard, Why Cities Matter, 18. 13 This article follows the position that Luke and Acts are written by one author, Luke, and form two parts of a unified whole: Luke-Acts. A helpful summary of recent discussions around the unity of Luke-Acts can be found in Michael F. Bird, ‘The Unity of Luke-Acts in Recent Discussion’, JSNT 29, no. 4 (2007), 425–448. 10 11

148


ministry in Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9). Finally, in light of these investigations of the text, it will conclude with some reflection on and response to the claims and arguments made by Keller and Um and Buzzard. 2. Luke 1:1–4, Acts 1:1–11 and Luke’s Purpose in Writing Acts

In order to assess the place of ‘the city’ in Acts, it is necessary to first form an understanding of Luke’s purpose in writing his two-part work, Luke-Acts. There is a great diversity of opinions. Darrell Bock identifies eleven different ‘credible suggestions’ 14 regarding Luke’s purpose, but states that only ‘those [views] centering on God’s role in salvation and his new community are most likely to reflect the key aspects of Luke’s comprehensive agenda.’ 15 He concludes that Luke wrote to relieve the tension felt by Christian Gentiles, such as Theophilus (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1), regarding the inclusion of Gentiles into a religious movement with roots in Judaism. 16 Schnabel broadly agrees with Bock, saying that ‘the purpose of Acts has to be understood in the context of the ongoing debate between the followers of Jesus Christ and the Jewish communities both in Palestine and in the diaspora.’ 17 In light of this debate, ‘Luke assures Gentiles who had converted to faith in Jesus as Messiah and Savior that being a Gentile in a Jewish movement was part of God’s plan.’ 18 However, he notes that a second purpose of Acts is to emphasise ‘the mission of the church whose leaders are obedient to the divine commission, charging them to take the gospel to cities and to regions in which the name of Jesus…has not yet been proclaimed.’ 19 Therefore, the purpose of Luke-Acts is to provide the reader with an explanation of both the identity of the church and the task of the church. Darrell L. Bock, Luke Volume One: 1:1 – 9:50 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 14. 15 Bock, Luke, 14. 16 Bock, Luke, 15. 17 Eckhard J. Schnabel, Acts (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 36–37. 18 Schnabel, Acts, 37. 19 Schnabel, Acts, 38. 14


149

F. F. Bruce also identifies a dual purpose for Luke-Acts, first that Luke’s ‘purpose in writing was to give Theophilus…an accurate and orderly account of the origins of Christianity’, 20 and also that it serves as an apologetic against the accusations that the faith was either subversive or illegitimate. 21 A variety of proposals have been made regarding the apologetic purpose of Luke-Acts, including that it provides a political apology for the church to Rome; an apology for Rome to the church; a legitimation of the Christian life in the context of the Roman Empire; equipping for Christians to faithfully live as Christians in the sometimes favourable, sometimes oppositional context of the Roman Empire; and that it has no political or apologetic element at all. 22 The choice from these suggestions rests heavily on whether the audience to whom Luke writes are Christians or non-Christians. For example, David Wenham, in light of passages such as Acts 18:2–3, argues that Luke writes to pagan Romans who may have been interested in Christianity and Judaism, but had questions about the tense relationship between the two. 23 I. Howard Marshall, on the other hand, says that Luke 1:1–4 shows that Luke-Acts is written to a Christian audience ‘in order to strengthen the faith and give assurance’,24 with any apologetic concerns being secondary. An analysis of Luke’s own words in the prologues of Luke and Acts will assist in adjudicating between these disparate scholarly opinions, and in providing further clarification of Luke’s purpose.

F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 8. Bruce, Acts, 8–13. 22 Steve Walton, ‘The State They Were In: Luke’s View of the Roman Empire’, Rome in the Bible and the Early Church, ed. Peter Oakes (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 2–12; David Wenham, ‘The Purpose of Luke-Acts: Israel’s Story in the Context of the Roman Empire’, Reading Luke: Interpretation, Reflection, Formation, eds Craig G. Bartholomew, Joel B. Green and Anthony C. Thiselton (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 96. 23 Wenham, ‘The Purpose of Luke-Acts’, 97. 24 I. Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary (Leicester: IVP, 1980), 21. 20 21

150


Luke 1:1–4

The prologue to the Gospel of Luke emphasises Luke’s purpose of bringing a trustworthy account of the things of Jesus, so that his audience may have certainty regarding the Christian teaching they had already received. He firstly commends his work to Theophilus by placing his ‘orderly account’ (v. 3) of the things of Jesus in the company of the ‘many’ (v. 1) who had previously endeavoured to collate eyewitness accounts. 25 Bock argues that καθώς (v. 2, ‘even as’) ‘describes how the accounts originated…The term stresses the reliable basis on which these accounts rested: traditions passed down to the reporters by the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.’ 26 Luke declares, therefore, his intention also to write an account that faithfully collates the trustworthy eyewitness accounts of all the things that God had fulfilled among them. In vv. 3–4, Luke proceeds to describe the particular emphasis that his work will have. Two words are particularly significant: καθεξῆς (orderly) and ἀσφάλεια (certainty). Joel Green suggests that ‘orderly’ implies a ‘notion of “persuasive order”’, 27 where the order is chosen for its ability to persuade the reader. This suggestion is particularly noteworthy when considering Luke’s interest in cities and urban ministry. Any theory that may be developed about his selection 28 of urban material must be founded upon Luke’s While some commentators see in Luke’s writing a critique of these other writers and their less than successful ‘endeavours,’ it is more likely, particularly in the light of καμοί (v. 2; ‘also to me’), that he is seeking to identify his efforts with theirs. Robert H. Stein, ‘Luke 1:1–4 and Traditionsgeschichte’, JETS 26, no. 4 (1983), 423; Paul W. Felix, ‘Literary Dependence and Luke’s Prologue’, MSJ 8, no. 1 (1997), 70; Richard J. Dillon, ‘Previewing Luke's Project from His Prologue (Luke 1:1–4)’, CBQ 43, no. 2 (1981), 208. 26 Bock, Luke, 57. 27 Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 44. Stein, ‘Luke 1:1–4’, 427, sees it as a synonym of ‘logical’. Bock, Luke, 62–63, identifies a variety of ‘orders’, including geographical and salvation-historical. 28 Schnabel, Acts, 29. Cf. Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 266. Schnabel is particularly careful to note the selective nature of Luke’s history. 25


151

purpose to provide an account that is trustworthy but also relevant for his particular audience.29 Luke addresses his two-volume work to κράτιστε Θεόφιλε (v. 4; ‘most excellent Theophilus’). The adjective κράτιστε suggests that he holds a high social status. 30 For more detail on the identity of Theophilus, most commentators look for clues in Luke’s subject matter. Bock suggests that ‘the amount of energy Luke spends in Acts defending the Gentile mission’ 31 points to Theophilus being a Gentile. Walton cites such content as Luke’s ‘warts and all’ presentation of Roman leadership An example of this can be seen in Luke’s use of πόλις language. Luke frequently places the action of his narrative in an urban environment (Luke 5:12; 7:37; 8:1; Acts 8:9; 14:13), attaches ‘πόλις’ to the proper names of localities (Luke 1:26; 9:10; Acts 14:6; 19:35), and even designates localities as ‘πόλις’ that other Evangelists label ‘κώμη’ (village; Bethsaida: Luke 9:10, Mark 8:22–23; Bethlehem: Luke 2:11, John 7:42). Luke’s emphasis on the ‘πόλις’ is not due to any lack of regional and village-based ministry. Acts 14:6–7 and Acts 26:19–20 prove that Luke is aware of ministry outside of the πόλις and is linguistically equipped to accurately speak about it, yet his focus remains on the ministry that occurs in urban settings. The quantity and precision of his geographical detail in Acts, weighted heavily to Paul’s broader mission rather than events in Judea, Galilee and Samaria, are evidence of the social settings in which Luke’s interests really lie. The frequency of πόλις language in Luke’s narrative is not necessarily direct proof of a presentation of an urban-focused missionary strategy. His terminology may also be explained by the urban context of the book’s production and intended readership. Luke’s urban emphasis supports his stated purpose of providing ‘certainty’ by offering vocabulary and narrative situations that are familiar for his readers and facilitate their engagement with the gospel narrative. Cf. Harvie M. Conn, ‘Lucan Perspectives and the City’, Missiology: An International Review 13, no. 4 (1985), 409–428; Martin Hengel, ‘The Geography of Palestine in Acts’, The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, ed. Richard Bauckham, The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 27–78; Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 285–286; A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and the Roman Law in the New Testament: The Sarum Lectures 1960–1961 (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 1963). 30 John Stott, The Message of Acts: To the Ends of the Earth (Nottingham: IVP, 1990). Cf. Acts 23:26; 24:3; 26:25. 31 Bock, Luke, 64. 29

152


to argue that he was most likely not writing to pagan Gentiles, but rather to Christians. 32 Alexander suggests that the vagueness of the phrase ‘the things that have been fulfilled’ (v. 1) presupposes a Christian reader because ‘it is unlikely anyone less privileged would have grasped the allusion.’ 33 It is most likely, then, that Theophilus is a Gentile of high social rank who is already a Christian but would benefit from greater ‘certainty’ regarding Christian teaching. 34 Alexander observes that while some dedicatees of ancient literature were not necessarily representative of the work’s intended audience, it is certainly possible that ‘some dedicatees did in some ways act as a catalyst for the production of the book dedicated to them.’ 35 It is reasonable, therefore, to understand Theophilus to be a patron who ‘can be regarded as typical of Luke’s readers.’ 36 It is in light of this understanding of Luke’s audience that the need for ἀσφάλεια becomes clear. Theophilus, previously placed in a high position within the dominant Gentile, pagan culture, had now become a Christian and was very likely experiencing a cultural ‘collision’.37 Luke then offers ‘certainty’ to Theophilus; not simply the factual nature of the content of his two volumes, but rather the stability that is found in Christ, the gospel message, and the Christian life despite the potential loss of social-political stability for the Gentile convert. Luke’s inclusion of urban material in Luke-Acts contributes to this purpose in two ways. First, it provides a narrative proof of the Walton, ‘The State They Were In’, 20–25. Loveday Alexander, The Preface to Luke's Gospel: Literary Conventions and Social Context in Luke 1.1–4 and Acts 1.1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 113. 34 Bruce Malina and John Pilch agree that ‘the focus of Luke-Acts is the Jesus ingroup…[which] means that these volumes are not documents for outsiders.’ Bruce J. Malina and John J. Pilch, Social-Science Commentary on the Book of Acts (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008), 6–7, 9. 35 Loveday Alexander, ‘What If Luke Had Never Met Theophilus?’, BibInt 8, no. 1/2 (2000), 164. 36 Marshall, Acts, 20. 37 Christopher Kavin Rowe, World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the GraecoRoman Age (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 17–18. 32 33


153

destabilising-but-not-seditious impact of the gospel message in the urban, imperial world that Theophilus inhabits, demonstrating to Theophilus that there is a profound ‘stability’ in the way that he has been taught. Secondly, it relates for Theophilus’ benefit the stories of how the gospel and its messengers have been put on trial within the legal-political forums of the empire and its cities, since that is the social-political world in which Theophilus will also have to assert and defend its claims. 38 Acts 1:1–11

Luke begins his second volume with a recapitulation of the first. In his Gospel, he had written about ‘all that Jesus began to do and to teach until that day when…he was taken up’ (vv. 1–2). The particle μέν (v. 1; ‘on the one hand’) suggests that Luke would go on to give an overview of Acts in comparison to the Gospel, but the expected particle δέ (‘on the other hand’) is missing. Barrett states that ‘a contrasting clause is implied in the summary of the contents of Acts in v. 8.’ 39 Whereas Luke’s Gospel was concerned with ‘all that Jesus began to do and to teach’, Acts will follow the expanding mission of the apostles’ witness to Jesus. This, however, does not imply that Jesus is not involved in this ‘new’ missionary work. To the contrary, ἤρξατο (v. 1; ‘he began’) should be given its full force. Whereas Luke is about what Jesus began to do, Acts records what Jesus continued to do through his apostles and the church, firstly by equipping his apostles with the content of their message (v. This second point is further evident in the use of the ἀσφαλής word group throughout Acts. It is used in the context of the factuality of the gospel message (2:36), the security of prisons in which Christians are held (5:23; 16:23), and in authorities seeking out ‘the facts’ regarding charges against Paul (21:34; 22:30; 25:26). It is the ἀσφάλεια of the gospel that trumps the strength of prisons in which Christians find themselves, or the ability or inability of the Roman judicial system to provide true justice. 39 C. K. Barrett, The Acts of the Apostles, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994), 65. 38

154


3), 40 and, secondly, through baptising them with the Holy Spirit in order to empower their witness to ‘the end of the earth’ (vv. 5, 8). 41 Acts 1:8, the commissioning of the disciples to worldwide witness, is commonly acknowledged as an outline of the contents of Acts. 42 There is some debate, however, regarding how to understand ἓως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς (v. 8; ‘to the end of the earth’). This debate is particularly relevant to this paper in light of Um and Buzzard’s strong statement about Paul’s mission reaching its goal once he had arrived in Rome. 43 Some commentators take ‘end of the earth’ as referring to a specific location such as Rome, Spain or the land of Israel, 44 whereas others Bruce, Acts, 32, equates Jesus’ post-resurrection teaching with ‘the things relating to the Lord Jesus Christ’, which form the theme of Paul’s teaching in Rome at the end of the book.’ 41 Barrett, Acts, 1, 66; Bruce, Acts, 30; Marshall, Acts, 55; David G. Peterson, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 101; Schnabel, Acts, 70; Wayne E. Weissenbuehler, ‘Acts 1:1–11’, Int 46, no. 1 (1992), 63. 42 Marshall, Acts, 25; Peterson, Acts, 6; Barrett, Acts, 1, 79. 43 Um and Buzzard, Why Cities Matter, 75. 44 Rome: Barrett, Acts, 1, 80. Spain, specifically the city Gades: E. Earle Ellis, ‘‘The End of the Earth’ (Acts 1:8)’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 1 (1991), 132. Israel: Daniel R. Schwartz, ‘The End of the Gē (Acts 1:8): Beginning or End of the Christian Vision?’, JBL 105, no. 4 (1986), 676. Schwartz understands this limited vision to be a primitive Christian vision that expanded as the church grew, even believing Jesus’ intention in his statement to have this narrow view. Malina and Pilch similarly see ‘the end of the earth’ as referring to the Mediterranean seashore, including such cities as Caesarea and Joppa, thus demarcating the area of a Jewish majority population. They argue that since Paul was not included in this command, the geographical references must only apply to the ministry that is completed before Paul’s own commission in 9:15. Interestingly, they argue that Paul’s call was to ‘proclaim the word of God to Israelite minorities living among non-Israelite majorities.’ While this may be tenable in light of passages that connect ‘Jews and Greeks’ to the synagogue, and thus to the Israelite religion (Acts 14:1; 18:4), it is much harder to defend in a passage such as Acts 19:10–19, that links ‘both Jews and Greeks’ to ‘all the residents of Asia’ and ‘all the residents of Ephesus.’ The most natural reading of Acts 19 is that Paul’s gospel mission is reaching all people, not simply Israelites. If this is so, Acts 1:8 can be read as a command to all Christians, 40


155

prefer the broader understanding of ‘the farthest reaches of the inhabited world known at the time.’ 45 Despite the fact that Acts ends in Rome, the city should not be equated with the ‘end of the earth’ for at least three reasons. First, while Rome may seem to be the end of the earth from a Jerusalem-centred perspective, 46 Theophilus, ‘a cosmopolitan patron who may have resided at Rome…would have thought it absurd to give such a designation to the ruling center of the Empire.’ 47 Secondly, if, as Kilgallen suggests, Theophilus lived in Rome, ‘the book of Acts ends when and where it does because Luke had in mind that his story reach only to the time and place in which Theophilus’ community was founded.’ 48 It is necessary to exercise caution on this point, but it is reasonable considering the previous discussion on Theophilus’ identity. It is possible that Luke, aware that the mission was grander in scale than merely targeting Rome, 49 ‘provides only selected illustrations’ 50 so that Theophilus may see how this God-wrought salvation had reached him and his community. Finally, as Schnabel notes, ‘Rome is not portrayed as a goal or fulfilment of the early Christian mission, but as a new starting point from represented by the Apostles, within which Paul’s particular call is included. Malina and Pilch, Social-Science Commentary on the Book of Acts, 22–23, 122– 23. 45 Schnabel, Acts, 79; Bruce, Acts, 37; Marshall, Acts, 60; Brian S. Rosner, ‘The Progress of the Word’, in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, eds I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 219. 46 C.f. Pss Sol 8:15. This verse is commonly taken to refer to Pompey coming from ‘the ends of the earth’ (Rome) to conquer Jerusalem. 47 Ellis, ‘The End of the Earth’, 127. 48 John J. Kilgallen, ‘Luke Wrote to Rome—a Suggestion’, Bib 88, no. 2 (2007), 252. 49 Cf. Acts 2:9–11; 8:26–27. Ethiopia is particularly noteworthy as it was viewed in Classical geography as an extreme end of the inhabited world: James M. Scott, ‘Luke’s Geographical Horizon’, The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting, eds David W.J. Gill and Conrad Gempf, The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 486. 50 Peterson, Acts, 113.

156


which the gospel was proclaimed.’ 51 Matthew Sleeman takes this even further, describing ‘the end of the earth’ as ‘a broader secondspace horizon which incorporates all earthly firstspaces within its scope.’ 52 He elaborates, ‘Secondspace, here characterised as witnessing space, stretches beyond the firstspace places mentioned in 1:8 as an unconstrained prospect, anticipating ongoing variegated encounters between witnesses and peopled places.’ 53 In other words, the reader is not supposed to find a single location, such as Rome, to define ‘the end of the earth’. Rather, every populated location on the earth has been included in ‘witnessing space’ where Jesus’ disciples have been commissioned to go and bear testimony to him, always looking for further fields in which to preach the good news. 54 In light of the understanding of Luke 1:1–4 and Acts 1:1–11 above, it can be argued that Luke’s purpose in writing Luke-Acts is to write a history of the early church, including the events of Jesus’ ministry and the expansion of the early church, for a predominantly Gentile Christian readership. In this history he defends the legitimacy of a Jesus-centred, multi-ethnic faith movement as the divinely intended development of historic and scriptural Judaism, and displays the inherently missionSchnabel, Acts, 79. Matthew Sleeman, Geography and the Ascension Narrative in Acts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 71. 53 Sleeman, Geography, 71. 54 Guy Prentiss Waters, ‘With a Whimper or a Bang? Acts 28 and the Ending of Acts’, RTR 74, no. 1 (2015), 9, recently argued that ‘the end of the earth’ in Acts 1:8 is an ethnic designation, not primarily a geographical one. Paul’s ministry in Rome is then seen as the fulfilment of this aspect of this commission, revealing the ‘gospel’s epochal progression to the Gentiles…The gospel has penetrated not only Jews and Samaritans, but also the Gentiles’ (p. 13). The question one must ask of this suggestion is, ‘Why did Luke not finish Acts simply with Peter and the Roman Centurion?’ The narrative of Acts 10:1 – 11:18 is significantly more ‘epochal’ in tenor than Acts 28. For other considerations of the open ending of Acts, cf. Loveday Alexander, Acts in Its Ancient Literary Context (London: T. & T. Clark, 2005), 213–229; and Troy M. Troftgruben, A Conclusion Unhindered: A Study of the Ending of Acts within Its Literary Environment, WUNT (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010). 51 52


157

centred nature of that movement. It has been suggested that the contents of Luke’s works were significantly shaped by his consideration of his audience, so that any emphasis on cities or Paul’s urban mission likely serves the purpose of providing more stability for Theophilus, and those like him, who have found their social-political status destabilised by their inclusion into the Christian community. There is no evidence within the prologues of Luke and Acts to suggest that he is writing with the purpose of offering instruction on the effective methods of the apostles and the early church. However, Luke is certainly offering a strong encouragement to his readers to participate in the continuing mission implied by Acts 1:8. 3. Case Study: Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9)

After Paul and Barnabas’ commission by the Antioch church in Acts 13:1–3, Luke records Paul’s ministry in the cities Salamis, Paphos, Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Perga, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem and Rome (Acts 13–28), including extended narratives of his time in Pisidian Antioch, Philippi, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus and Rome. A full analysis of Luke’s portrayal of these cities in his narrative would require significantly more space than this article allows. Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9) has been chosen for closer analysis as a representative of Luke’s shorter city narratives, which offer a more paradigmatic example of his treatment of the city; as opposed to his longer narratives that include more references to local idiosyncrasies. 55 While numerous commentators note the influential and strategic nature of Thessalonica, Luke’s account of Paul’s missionary activity in the city (Acts 17:1–9) emphasises different concerns. First, Luke highlights that Thessalonica was ‘where there was a synagogue’ (Acts 17:1) and describes a ministry of the gospel that starts with the Jews but also extends to the Gentiles. Secondly, Luke is interested in the city as the locus of conflict and trial for the new Christian community. He shows that it is not only the ‘primary instigators’ Paul and Silas who bear For example, the reference to the Athenians’ interest in hearing new things (Acts 17:21).

55

158


the brunt of the opposition; the whole Christian community is implicated in the perceived seditious behaviour. Where There Was a Synagogue

Having left Philippi (Acts 16:40), Paul and Silas arrived in Thessalonica after they had ‘passed through’ (διοδεύσαντες, v. 1) Amphipolis and Apollonia. Διοδεύω only appears twice in the New Testament: here and in Luke 8:1 where it is said of Jesus, ‘He went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news.’ Barrett comments, ‘Were it not for [Luke 8:1] one would be inclined to think that Luke had here abandoned his usual διέρχεσθαι (which sometimes at least refers to preaching mission) because Paul and his companions passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia without stopping to preach there. This may in any case be true.’ 56 While the use of διοδεύω may not conclusively prove whether or not Paul and Silas engaged in ministry in Amphipolis or Apollonia, the fact that Luke does not narrate any ministry in either city leads commentators to assume that these were merely rest points on the journey from Philippi to Thessalonica. 57 This is an interesting point, considering Polhill’s assertion that Amphipolis ‘would have been a significant place for witness’, 58 as it was the capital of the first district in Macedonia 59 and held a strategic location for access to the Hellespont C. K. Barrett, The Acts of the Apostles, vol. 2 (London: T. & T. Clark, 2004), 808. Cf. Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 262. Schnabel notes that in light of Acts 8:4 and 13:6, διέρχεσθαι ‘describes missionary activity.’ 57 Ben Witherington, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 503; Peterson, Acts, 477; Bruce, Acts, 322. 58 John B. Polhill, Acts (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 360. 59 Darrell L. Bock, Acts (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 549. Macedonia was divided into four districts. Amphipolis was the capital of the ‘first’ or most eastern district (the district in which Philippi was also a ‘leading city’, Acts 16:12). Thessalonica was the capital of the second district as well as the whole province of Macedonia. Cf. F. F. Bruce, ‘St. Paul in Macedonia’, BJRL 61, no. 2 (1979), 341; David W.J. Gill, ‘Macedonia’, The Book of Acts in Its GraecoRoman Setting, eds David W.J. Gill and Conrad Gempf, The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 414. 56


159

and the Black Sea. Both the fact that Paul bypasses the city and that Luke bothers to inform his readers that Paul bypassed it are noteworthy points in considering Luke’s use of Paul’s mission in his narrative. The most common explanation of why Paul pressed on to Thessalonica is because of its greater size and status. Strabo called it the ‘metropolis of what is now Macedonia.’ 60 It was the capital of the Roman province and had a close relationship with Rome. 61 Schnabel and Peterson both note that it was the largest city of the region, and Schnabel suggests that this was a ‘reason why the city was an ideal location for missionary work.’ 62 While the status of the city is relevant for understanding the conflict that arises, Luke does not in the first instance comment on the city’s size or status. 63 Rather, he reminds the reader that Thessalonica was ‘where there was a synagogue of the Jews’ (Acts 17:1). Barrett suggests that ὅπου (‘where’) potentially ‘contains a causal element; Paul and his company halted in Thessalonica because there was a synagogue there.’ 64 Malina and Pilch take this as evidence that ‘Paul was not interested in non-Israelites’, 65 however, this conclusion is far from necessary. Paul’s strategic targeting of a city with a synagogue is supported by Luke’s note that going into the synagogue was Paul’s custom (κατὰ…τὸ εἰωθὸς τῷ Παύλῳ, v. 2). While Paul is commonly known as the Apostle to the Gentiles, his call included ministry to both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:15); and Paul himself notes that salvation in Christ is offered ‘to the Jew first and also to the Greek’ (Rom 1:16; cf. Acts 13:46–47). 66 In light of this theological conviction, the strategy of Strabo, Geography, 7.7.21, in The Geography of Strabo: Literally Translated, With Notes, in Three Volumes, trans H. C. Hamilton and W. Falconer (London: George Bell & Sons, 1903). 61 Witherington, Acts, 503. 62 Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 272; Peterson, Acts, 477. 63 In contrast with Acts 16:12, where Luke notes that Philippi was ‘a leading city of the district of Macedonia and a Roman colony.’ 64 Barrett, Acts, 2, 809. 65 Malina and Pilch, Social-Science Commentary on the Book of Acts, 122. 66 Cf. Philip H. Towner, ‘Mission Practice and Theology under Construction (Acts 18–20)’, Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, eds I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 421. I. 60

160


targeting cities with synagogues makes perfect sense. As Schnabel observes: Apart from being the meeting place of local Jews, the synagogues provided the opportunity to meet Gentiles who already believed in Israel’s God: Gentiles who had converted to the Jewish faith (the proselytes), Gentiles who regularly attended the synagogue services and probably observed some Jewish laws (God-fearers) and other Gentile sympathizers who were attracted by the ethical monotheism of the Jewish faith. 67

Luke’s record of Paul’s ministry in the Thessalonian synagogue illustrates the success of this strategy. The outcome was that ‘some’ Jews, ‘a great many of the devout Greeks’ and ‘not a few of the leading women’ were persuaded (ἐπείσθησαν) and joined to (προσεκληρώθησαν) Paul and Silas (17:4). 68 Paul’s comment in 1 Thess 1:9, that the Thessalonians had ‘turned to God from idols’, also suggests that further growth in the church came from the pagan population of the city. 69 While the size and influential status of Thessalonica may have been a significant factor in Paul bypassing Amphipolis and Apollonia, another factor influencing his choice could have been the lack of established Jewish communities in the smaller cities. 70 Luke’s narrative highlights the synagogue in Paul’s ministry in Thessalonica and how it illustrates the progress of salvation to both Jews and Gentiles.

Howard Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1970), 183–84. 67 Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 293. 68 Keener notes that ‘Luke has literary reason (cf. Luke 1:3) to emphasize the conversion of aristocrats and other people of influence…the example of rich converts would especially encourage higher-status members of Luke’s ideal audience.’ This is perhaps further evidence of Luke’s ‘persuasive order’. Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary Volume 3 15:1 – 23:35 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2014), 2543. 69 Peterson, Acts, 479; Schnabel, Acts, 705. 70 Marshall, Acts, 276; Peterson, Acts, 477; Barrett, Acts, 2, 809.


161

The City in an Uproar

The comment in 17:4 that the new believers were joined to Paul and Silas ‘may well suggest that they [were] meeting separately from the Jews’, 71 possibly in the house of Jason. 72 This ‘exodus’ raised the jealousy of the Jews, possibly because of the loss of potential proselytes, 73 but more likely because of ‘the loss of influential patrons in the city.’ 74 The Jews acted on their jealousy in ‘two distinct procedures.’ 75 First, having gathered some unsavoury characters from the marketplace, they threw the city into an uproar, seeking to drag Paul and Silas 76 before the mob (τὸν δῆμον, v. 5). There is some scholarly disagreement on how to understand τὸν δῆμον in this context. Bruce, Hardin and Sherwin-White understand τὸν δῆμον to be the ‘citizen body [that] discharged legislative and juridical functions.’ 77 Barrett and Rowe, on the other hand, see τὸν δῆμον as a violent mob, the object of the Jews’ action of ὀχλοποιήσαντες (‘gathered a crowd’, v. 5). Barrett says, ‘Ordinarily δῆμος would deserve a better translation, but Luke appears to have in mind not an orderly assembly but a riotous gathering bent on violence.’ 78 Rowe adds the following: Instead of upstanding and law-abiding citizens who join the Jews in effort [sic] to corral the city’s troubles, the agora ruffians are explicitly characterized as πονηρός (“wicked”); in addition, a crowd has already been formed, the city is in an uproar, and the house of Jason is attacked. Of course in Ephesus there is both a large riot and an ἐκκλησία, but here Bock, Acts, 550. Schnabel, Acts, 704. 73 F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 370. 74 Schnabel, Acts, 706. 75 Justin K. Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas at Thessalonica: An Illegal Assembly in Jason’s House (Acts 17.1–10a)’, NTS 52, no. 1 (2006), 33. 76 Αὐτούς in vv. 5–6 most likely refers to Paul and Silas rather than Jason and the other brothers who are next to get accosted by the crowd. Cf. Barrett, Acts, 2, 813. 77 Bruce, Acts, 370. Cf. Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 43; Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 96. 78 Barrett, Acts, 2, 813. 71 72

162


in Thessalonica the image is rather that of a crowd waiting outside Jason’s house to deliver the verdict, that is, to accomplish their lynching (cf. ὄχλος in vv. 5 and 8). 79

E. A. Judge, who also views the crowd as a duly constituted civic assembly, calls Paul’s behaviour in this scene a ‘tantalising question.’ 80 He comments that the text of Acts does not give an answer as to why Paul would let his hosts go before the city authorities while he stayed hidden away, and yet could confidently assert his blameless conduct to the Thessalonians (1 Thess 1:5). 81 Understanding the crowd as a ‘lynch mob’ rather than a duly constituted civic assembly may explain Paul and Silas’ unwillingness to face their accusers. It is plausible that the new believers themselves are actively shielding Paul and Silas, much like the way in which the believers and Asiarchs in Ephesus stop Paul from going before the crowd (Acts 19:30–31). 82 The Jews’ inability to find Paul and Silas led to a change in strategy: they dragged Jason and some of the brothers before the city authorities (or ‘politarchs’, τοὺς πολιτάρχας, v. 6). 83 Their accusations have three distinct elements: (1) these men (namely Paul and Silas) who are ‘a force of sedition in an otherwise civilized world’ 84 have now arrived in Thessalonica (v. 6); (2) ‘Jason has received them’ (v. 7), offering them 79 80

2.

Rowe, World Upside Down, 94. E. A. Judge, ‘The Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica’, RTR 30, no. 1 (1971),

Judge, ‘Decrees’, 2. Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 47. 83 Greg R. Horsley notes that ‘the politarchate was a senior, annual magistracy attested predominantly in cities of Macedonia after Roman intervention in the second century B.C. …Its holder(s) functioned in a civic capacity, apparently without jurisdiction over military affairs’, and, ‘[the politarchs] would be answerable to the citizen body in their respective poleis, but at the same time would be responsible also to the Roman authorities to ensure order in their cities.’ G. H. R. Horsley, ‘The Politarchs’, The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting, eds David W. J. Gill and Conrad Gempf, The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 421, 424–425. 84 Rowe, World Upside Down, 96. Cf. Acts 21:38 81 82


163

his hospitality; and (3) they ‘are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus’ (v. 7). The politarchs and the crowd are ‘disturbed’ (ἐτάραξαν, v. 8) by these serious accusations and ‘take security’ (λαβόντες τὸ ἱκανόν, v. 9) from Jason and the other believers before releasing them. Following this, the brothers immediately send Paul and Silas off to Berea (17:10). The interplay of accusations and judgement in this passage has been the focus of some scholarly attention. In particular, there has been exploration of the accusation of ‘acting against the decrees of Caesar’ and the seemingly light punishment of taking a monetary bond and (possibly) banishment. Clarifying this scene is important because the events of this passage may reveal civic authorities who are favourable, or at least gentle, towards the Christian community; or it may reveal authorities who executed the full judgement that they could with the ‘culprits’ presented to them. Three explanations have been offered for how to understand ‘the decrees of Caesar’ (τῶν δογμάτων Καίσαρος, v. 7). First, the traditional view is that the decrees of Caesar ‘referred to the imperial laws against treason (leges maiestatis).’ 85 This view was rejected by E. A. Judge, because maiestas ‘was founded upon public law, not Caesarian decree’, was ‘framed specifically to cater for the offences of the Roman nobleman’, and, therefore, would be prosecuted by the peers of these noblemen, not in a foreign court. 86 It was Judge who suggested the second explanation: that the ‘decrees’ refer to Caesarean edicts against the prediction of a change of rulers. 87 Paul’s teaching in the letters to the Thessalonians contains elements that could be construed as such predictions (1 Thess 4:2–3; 2 Thess 2:3– 5). 88 While Judge notes that the enforcement of those edicts would fall under the jurisdiction of the Roman proconsul of Macedonia, rather than the Thessalonian politarchs, he explains the involvement of the local magistrates by their responsibility to administer the oath of loyalty, Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 30. Judge, ‘Decrees’, 2. Cf. Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 31–32. 87 Judge, ‘Decrees’, 3. 88 Judge, ‘Decrees’, 3. 85 86

164


which would be broken by those predicting a change of rulers. 89 The strength of both views is that they define ‘the decrees’ in such a way that they could be broken by ‘proclaiming another king’ (v. 7). There has, however, been some pushback against Judge’s assertions. Rowe is cautious about assuming too much from the Thessalonian correspondence, and highlights that the Acts 17 text gives no suggestion of prediction or prophecies in Paul’s teaching. 90 Hardin is doubtful, in light of the original scope of the Caesarean edicts, that Paul would have actually been guilty of contravening them. 91 He also notes that ‘Judge does not take cognisance of the close relationship between maiestas and…astrology’, 92 a relationship that collapses any real separation between these first two explanations of ‘the decrees.’ If either of these first two explanations is correct, two implications could be drawn regarding the Christian mission in the city. First, the assumption of most commentators advocating these views is that the charges are directed towards Paul and Silas, with Jason and the others only acting as their proxy. 93 This may suggest that while new believers in cities like Thessalonica may face some difficulties for their conversion, it is only the missionaries who would face serious legal repercussions. Secondly, while the crimes of maiestas and breaking the oath of loyalty were serious—‘even an unfounded suspicion of this kind was enough to ruin anyone against whom it was brought’ 94—the politarchs dealt with Paul, Silas, Jason and the others in a ‘moderate but effective’ manner. 95 For a reader like Theophilus, a more recent convert who may or may not have been involved in the thick of missionary activity, but may have much to lose due to his socio-economic status, such an understanding of the passage may be quite comforting. Judge, ‘Decrees’, 5–7. Rowe, World Upside Down, 97. 91 Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 36. 92 Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 36. 93 Cf. Bruce, Acts, 325; Peterson, Acts, 482–483; Witherington, Acts, 509. 94 Bruce, Acts, 325. 95 Bruce, Acts, 372. 89 90


165

A third explanation, however, has been offered by Hardin. He argues that ‘the decrees’ refer to Roman regulations regarding voluntary associations, particularly those with political agendas. 96 He says, ‘The available evidence suggests that although voluntary associations could (and did) generally go unregulated, they were ruled against when they either failed to remain free from political interests or contributed to civic unrest.’ 97 In regards to the appropriate punishment for participating in these associations, Hardin highlights a municipal constitution from Spain, dated to 69–96 CE, describing the penalty as being payment of a ‘monetary fine to the municipal authorities.’ 98 In this third explanation, Paul and Silas are not in view at all. Since they could not be found, the Jews changed tactics and brought Jason and the other brothers before the politarchs to be tried for their own actions, not as proxies for Paul and Silas. 99 This would seem to accord with the text, particularly the accusation of Jason’s reception of the missionaries and the comment that ‘they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus’ (v. 7, emphasis added). Jason and the other brothers, according to their accusers, are active participants in the illegal behaviour and thus are liable for punishment. In this understanding, Jason and the brothers receive the fitting punishment for a lighter crime, rather than a lightened punishment for a serious crime. Taking a slightly different approach, Rowe embraces a certain mystery regarding ‘the decrees’, instead opting to focus only on what the text of Acts 17 clearly says. He asserts that it is best to read the accusation in reverse order and see it as one unified argument: ‘by proclaiming Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 39. Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 42. 98 Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 46. 99 Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 33. Cf. Schnabel, Acts, 708. According to Hardin, Paul and Silas were not banished (like in Philippi, Acts 16:39). Rather they fled, or were encouraged to leave by the new believers, for their own safety, much like the events in Damascus (Acts 9:25) and Ephesus (Acts 19:30–31). Hardin, ‘Decrees and Drachmas’, 47–48. 96 97

166


another king, the Christians act against the decrees of Caesar and thereby turn the world upside down.’ 100 He adds the following. The opponents’ accusations are at one and the same time both true and false. They are false in that they attempt to place Jesus in competitive relation to Caesar. Such a positioning can only lead to a politics of revolt. The accusations are true, however, in that the Christian mission entails a call to another way of life, one that is—on virtually every page of the Acts of the Apostles—turning the world upside down. 101

Rowe’s comments explain the delicate position in which the Christian missionaries and new believers found themselves in the Roman context. While they may have no intention of acting seditiously or contravening Caesar’s decrees, as long as they proclaimed Jesus as king, Messiah and Lord, they would be open to being misconstrued and to false accusation, and would increasingly feel the gap between the culture around them and their new life in Christ. In conclusion, the scene in Thessalonica shows two important aspects of the place of ‘the city’ in Luke’s narrative. First, rather than highlighting the strategic nature of this city for the evangelisation of the Roman Empire, Luke seems more interested in how Thessalonica fits into the story of a salvation that comes ‘to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.’ Luke’s mention of the bypassed cities, his editorial note highlighting the synagogue, and his description of the ethnically and socio-economically diverse people who responded to the synagogue ministry are evidence of this interest. Secondly, Acts 17:1–9 illustrates Luke’s interest in the city as the locus within which the trial of the apostles and new believers takes place. While the ‘courtroom’ scene presents myriad challenges for understanding, it is clear that it is not only Paul and Silas, the primary evangelists, but also the new Christian community that come under the watchful eyes of their opponents and the city authorities because of the message that they have believed and proclaimed. While the punishment in this case may have been reasonably gentle, it seems that the whole Christian community is implicated in the conflict. Luke, operating with 100 101

Rowe, World Upside Down, 96. Rowe, World Upside Down, 101–102. Cf. Peterson, Acts, 482.


167

his intention to provide ‘certainty’ for Theophilus, illustrates that ‘certainty’ and security for the Christian will not be found in maintaining a palatable façade for the surrounding culture, but rather in the kingdom of the new king, Jesus. 4. Conclusion

The aim of this article has been to test the claim that the urban material in Acts represents a strategic targeting of cities by the early church and justifies an emphasis on urban mission today. It was suggested that an accurate assessment of the role of the city in Acts would require an understanding of Luke’s purposes in writing and how his use of urban material helped to achieve those ends. An exegesis of the prologues of Luke and Acts and a case study of city ministry in Thessalonica were provided to explore, respectively, Luke’s purpose in writing and use of urban material. The study of the prologues revealed that Luke’s two-part work is firstly historiographical, recording a trustworthy account of ‘the things that have been accomplished among us’ (Luke 1:1), including the works and teaching of Jesus and the continuation of that ministry through the witness of the church (Acts 1:1–8). His history is ‘ordered’ for a particular audience—Theophilus, a Gentile Christian who likely lived in an urban context such as Rome, and those like him. Secondly, Luke writes so his readers ‘may have certainty concerning the things [they have] been taught’ (Luke 1:4). This ‘certainty’ (ἀσφάλεια), considering the usage of the ἀσφάλεια word group in judicial contexts in Acts 21:34, 22:30 and 25:26, suggests not just knowledge of the facts, but the assurance and stability that the gospel offers in the face of trial and persecution. Luke, therefore, writes not just to inform his readers, but to offer certainty and assurance for them regarding their status in the Christian faith in the midst of trial and social destabilisation. While missionary strategies may be inferred or deduced from Luke’s record, his prologues give no suggestion that providing these strategies was one of his major purposes in writing. It was noted that a significant argument for an urban ministry emphasis in Acts is that the narrative ends in Rome (Acts 28) as some kind of fulfilment of Jesus’ instruction in Acts 1:8 for his disciples to be

168


his witnesses ‘to the end of the earth.’ This, however, is almost certainly not the case. ‘The end of the earth’ should not be confined to a single geographical location; rather, it is a call to continue bearing witness to Christ in all locations to all peoples. The case study of Thessalonica revealed that while many commentators note the strategic value of this city, Luke does not mention such things. Luke’s interest in the city, rather, lay in two distinct areas: (i) the city as an illustration of the universal salvation given by God to both Jews and Greeks; and (ii) the city as the locus of conflict and legal trials for the Christian community. Salvation to both Jews and Greeks was evident through Luke’s mention of the bypassed cities that are not known to have had Jewish communities, and his specific mention of the synagogue in Thessalonica (Acts 17:1). His record of the synagogue ministry acknowledged the variety of ethnic backgrounds of those who responded to the gospel. The city as the locus of trial and conflict for the new Christian community is evidenced in missionaries and the churches being dragged before courts and assemblies, and bound in chains despite being guilty of nothing but proclaiming the gospel. The outcomes of these trials, though, do not clearly demonstrate the harmlessness of the Christians and the favour of Rome. In Thessalonica, the Christians have to pay a fine, possibly for their illegal assembly. Both of these emphases are important for Luke to offer ‘certainty’ to his readers. Theophilus is faced with (at least) two problems in his new faith: (i) What place does a Gentile believer have in a religious movement with roots in Judaism?; and (ii) How does a Gentile Christian inhabit the pagan social world of the Roman Empire? Luke’s narration of the spread of the gospel from Jerusalem through the cities of the Roman Empire offers some answers. The faith response by both Jew and Greek in the synagogue and the marketplace illustrates that salvation has been given by God to both. While the Gentile believer will be socially destabilised by their new faith, they will find a profound stability in the Gospel. Luke cites Paul as an example of how a Roman citizen can utilise the benefits the Empire offers while maintaining ultimate fidelity to Christ and the gospel (without denying the real possibility of persecution at the hands of that same Empire).


169

In sum, Luke’s keen interest in the city in Acts is not primarily in relation to questions of strategy. Rather, his concerns relate to how the ministry of the gospel in the cities of the Roman Empire illustrated the answers to the theological question of the ethnic diversity of ‘The Way’, and the pastoral question of how former pagan, Gentile Christians could now inhabit the imperial social world. There are many good reasons for the Church today to invest energy and resources in targeting cities for church planting and mission. Keller and Um and Buzzard discuss many of them in detail. This means, however, that it is unnecessary to force more of an argument for urban mission out of Acts than the text actually warrants. Perhaps, rather than using Acts to emphasise urban ministries today, more work can be done to: (i) assess where the ‘ends of the earth’ are to which the gospel needs to be taken today; (ii) consider how the message of Acts can be applied to ministry so that the Christian church reflects the diversity that was so important to Luke and so central to God’s plan of salvation; and (iii) develop pastoral theologies focusing on applying the gospel to different contexts, whether urban, suburban, rural or remote. Pursuing these lines of thinking may well lead to an urbanfocused ministry strategy, but it is the opinion of this paper that to get to an urban focus through these considerations would be more faithful to the text of Acts than an approach based on the unwarranted inference that ‘Acts focuses on cities so we should too.’ DAVID EVANS Brisbane, Queensland