No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Systematic Approach to the Christology of Peter's Address to the Crowd
(Acts 2:14–36)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2024
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Original Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author 2006. Journal compilation © The Dominican Council/Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2006, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
References
1 The present essay would have not been possible without the help of Francis B. Watson, Andrew D. Clarke and Francesca A. Murphy. My gratitude goes also to my friend Chris Asprey.
2 Cfr.: JENSON, Robert W., Systematic Theology, vol. I, Oxford University Press, Oxford – New York, 1997Google Scholar.
3 Ibid., p. 59.
4 Ibid.
5 Cfr.: MURPHY, Francesca A., The Comedy of Revelation, Paradise Lost and Regained in Biblical Narrative, T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 2000Google Scholar.
6 Robert W. JENSON, op. cit., p. 46.
7 Jenson clearly states that there would be no Bible without the Church (op. cit., p. 59). Nevertheless, he does not seem to escape the dangers of pantheism. Although this brief article does not allow me to produce a satisfactory argument, I would like to suggest that this “contradiction” is intrinsic to the narrative method, which is forgetful of the systematic nature of the Bible itself.
8 1Jn 4:8; 16.
9 Ac 2:14–36.
10 The Church is here the new Israel. God's promise of salvation is no more contained within the boundaries of one nation. The Apostles are sent to be Christ's witnesses “to earth's remotest end”. (Acts 1:8).
11 Most probably, the speech does not contain the exact words spoken by Peter. In compiling the sermon Luke was faithful to the original theological message. However, he was also quite free in arranging the structure of the discourse according to his own needs. We share Moffatt's position on the speeches in Acts. Possibly, the author trustworthily reports the general themes of the Jewish-Christian preaching of the period. However, we cannot consider the speeches as literary transpositions of what actually was said on every specific occasion. Most probably, the author had access to oral tradition, or even written sources, which he used to compose discourses satisfactorily harmonised with the period he was engaged in depicting. See: M. SOARDS, The Speeches in Acts, Westminster, Louisville, 1994. Furthermore, the style of Luke's speeches does not reflect the style of his narratives. The speeches are not composed in the elegant Greek used for the narratives: although Luke could not compile a verbatim account of the original speeches, he reported “at least the gist of what was really said on the various occasions”(F.F., BRUCE, The Acts of the Apostles, The Tyndale Press, London, 1952, p. 18–21Google Scholar).
12 Cfr. The New Jerusalem Bible – Study Edition, Darton, Longman & Todd Ltd,. London, 1994, p. 1801Google Scholar, footnote 2e.
13 Ibid. footnote 2f.
14 Ibid. See also BRUCE F.F., op cit., p 85.
15 3:11–26; 10:34–43; 13:17–41.
16 BRUCE F.F., op. cit., p. 88.
17 According to the original Hebrew chapter divisions. In the Septuagint 3:1 corresponds to 2:28 and 4:1 to 3:1.
18 It is interesting to note that the Church understands Herself has holding the authority to give a theological interpretation of Scriptures. Luke does it at the point of “altering” the words of the prophecy, to make it more theologically meaningful.
19 See, for instance: Gn 41:38; Ex 31:2; 1S 16:13; Dn:45f.
20 See Nb 11:29; Ezk 36:27; (obviously) Jl 3:1–2; and especially Zc 4:6 and 6:8.
21 Heb 6:5.
22 See, for instance: Josephus, Antiquities, XX.8.6.
23 Mt 1616–17, Mk 5:1–20; 10:46–52; 14:61–62. For a more detailed exposition of the problem see: John DRANE, Introducing the New Testament, Lion Publishing plc, Oxford, 1999, p. 66–70.
24 Lk 17:30; 18:8; 21:36; 22:69.
25 Jl 2:11. See also 4:15–17.
26 Some texts have either “Sheol” or “death” instead of “Hades”.
27 The dogma of the Immaculate Conception implies that the Virgin Mary has been preserved from sin. However, she is not sinless in the same way as Christ ontologically is.
28 Ps 110:1.
29 In the book of Acts this title is used for the first time by Paul (9:20).
30 For a confirmation see, for instance, Ac 13:32–33; Rm1:4; Heb 1:5; 5:5; etc.
31 Cfr.: BRUCE F.F., op. cit., p. 96.