The God of Luke–Acts

Introduction

The Gospel of Luke begins with “the things that have been fulfilled among us” (1:2 NIV), and Acts ends with Paul’s declaration that “God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles” (28:28 NIV). These two expressions are “divine passives” (indirect action that implies God’s agency), and they exemplify one of the narrator’s typical methods of describing God. Throughout Luke–Acts, God shapes events, but ordinarily through indirect means: by signs, through angels, or in visions. Occasionally, the narrator lifts the curtain, and the hidden God speaks or acts directly; more often, what God does or intends is made known in the narrative through the descriptions of focal characters. The focal speakers do not always agree. They speak from their own point of view, giving readers more than one perspective on God and God’s will. Close attention to these and other narrative strategies will allow a composite portrait of the God of Luke–Acts to emerge. ¹

This study focuses on how God functions as a character, and on how God is understood by other characters in Luke and Acts. ² The implied author of the Third Gospel ³ (referred to in this article by the traditional name Luke) was a Christian, probably a Gentile, but one who, like Jesus, worshiped the God of Israel. Much of what he probably believed about God went unexpressed in his two volumes because he assumed the authority of the Tanakh (albeit in Greek).

Divine Identifiers in Luke–Acts

The evangelist’s evolving terminology for Jesus and God throughout the narrative reveals their unique relationship, while maintaining some separation between them. Luke–Acts most often designates God with the term “God” or “Lord,” and from the outset, Luke uses these identifiers interchangeably. God/Lord is described as holy, merciful, strong, and faithful, one who helps the poor and frustrates the rich and powerful, protects and saves Israel from enemies. Luke begins using “Lord” ambiguously, perhaps in reference to Jesus, as when John the Baptist proclaims: “Prepare the way of the Lord” (Luke 3:4; cf. 1:76). Is John preparing the way for Jesus as Lord, for God, or both? When the narrator later says that “the Lord’s power was so that he [Jesus] could heal” (5:17, my trans.), does Luke mean that God’s power enabled Jesus to heal, or that Jesus’ power was aimed at healing, or both? By 7:13, the narrator begins calling Jesus “the Lord,” as part of a deliberate complication of the difference between the characters of “Jesus” and “God.” ⁴

Characters in the birth narratives use scriptural names for God: “Most High,” “Lord God,” “Lord God of Israel,” and “Mighty One.” Mary calls God “my Savior” (1:47), another title shared with Jesus (2:11); Simeon calls God “Master” (despota; 2:29), while elsewhere the term “Master” also identifies Jesus (epistata; 5:5). Jesus calls God “Father” (2:49). Throughout Luke’s narrative, however, Jesus more often uses theos (“God”) to designate the deity, especially when speaking of things pertaining to God: the kingdom of God, the angels of God, the word of God, etc. Jesus also names God “Most High,” “Lord of the harvest,” “Lord of heaven and earth,” “Lord,” “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,” and “God of the living.” ⁵

Despite Jesus’ instruction that his followers should pray to God as “Father” (11:2), they never do, in either Luke or Acts. Only Jesus addresses God as “Father,” and in his teaching about God he speaks of “the Father,” “my Father,” “your Father,” and “the heavenly Father.” Though the narrator once names God “Father” (Acts 1:4; see Luke 24:49), and Peter also once refers to “the Father” in the same way (Acts 2:33), “Father” primarily connotes the relationship between the characters Jesus and God, while “Lord” connotes the relationship between Jesus, God, and the other characters. ⁶

In Acts, in contrast to Luke, the title “Lord” becomes more fluid in reference to both God and Jesus. In some cases the reference is clear. The early church prays to God as “Master” (despota) and “Lord” (kyrios) in Acts 4:24–30, and since the prayer mentions “your holy servant Jesus,” it follows that “Lord” in this case means God. On the Damascus Road Paul addresses the “Lord,” who identifies himself: “I am Jesus” (9:4–6). Many other examples are not as clear, and one suspects that the ambiguity is Luke’s literary strategy to associate and yet differentiate God the Father and Jesus. For instance, the disciples ask the “Lord” to choose Judas’ replacement (1:15–26); here, both God and Jesus are plausible referents. Other examples of this ambiguity include the expressions “entrusted them to the Lord” (14:23) and “the hand of the Lord” (11:21), either of which could refer to Jesus or God. Moreover, both “the word of God” and “the word of the Lord,” when used for what believers preach to outsiders, mean “the story of Jesus,” and when the preaching has positive results, the new Gentile believers can be said to be “turning to God” (15:19) or becoming “believers in God” (16:34) as well as believing “on the Lord Jesus” (16:31 NKJV).

The Holy Spirit also becomes a fluid character, called “my Spirit” by God (2:17–18), “the Spirit of the Lord” by Peter (5:9), and “the Spirit of Jesus” (16:7) by the narrator. One could multiply examples like these, but perhaps the effect is clear: the use of “Lord,” like the use of other terms for the divine, emphasizes an identity between Jesus and God, while also maintaining some separation between them.

God in the Birth Narratives (Luke 1–2)

In the birth narratives, God frequently acts, but almost always does so through agents: angels come to Zechariah, Mary, and the shepherds, while the Spirit comes to Simeon. The narrator normally describes God’s actions in the passive voice (e.g., 1:26, 41, 67; 2:26, 40), once using the active voice to name something God does—Elizabeth’s neighbors and kin heard “that the Lord made his mercy great with her” (1:58, my trans.)—but even that instance is somewhat indirect, almost like hearsay. God does not speak directly in Luke 1–2, but twice sends Gabriel to speak (to Zechariah in 1:13–17, 19–20; to Mary in 1:28, 30–33, 35–37), and confirms the truth of the revelation to Mary by Elizabeth’s Spirit-inspired speech and by John’s intra-uterine leap (1:41–45). In the first chapters of the Gospel, Luke might have included a declaration to Jesus of his relationship to God (mirroring Luke 10:21–22; though cf. 2:49), or might have described a visit from Gabriel to the child Jesus. Instead, the narrator refrains from spelling out certain divine interventions that the reader can infer, and in this section, allows the angels, the Spirit, and five focal characters to do the work.

In Luke 1–2 five characters speak for or about God, each one shown to be reliable: the angel Gabriel “stand[s] in the presence of God” and is “sent” to Zechariah and later Mary (1:19, 26); Elizabeth and Zechariah are “filled with the Spirit” (1:41, 67); the Holy Spirit rests on and guides Simeon (2:25–27); and Mary enjoys the favor and presence of “the Lord” and learns that the Holy Spirit “will come upon” her (1:28, 35). Gabriel, Elizabeth, Mary, Zechariah, and Simeon all use the active voice to describe what God has done (1:25, 28, 49–54, 68–79; 2:15, 29–32). These focal characters also use the narrator’s preferred divine passive to describe God’s actions: Gabriel tells Zechariah, “[Y]our prayer has been heard ” (1:13) and “I have been sent to speak to you” (1:19); Simeon tells Mary and Joseph, “This one has been set” (2:34, my trans.).

The infancy narratives emphasize God’s covenant relationship with Israel and present a positive image and role for the temple. ⁷ The birth narratives also emphasize that these designated spokespersons, all pious first-century Jews, lived God-centered lives: e.g., “righteous before God,” “serving as priest before God,” “great in the sight of the Lord” (1:6, 8, 15). Mary, Zechariah, and Simeon all interpret God’s actions as motivated by God’s faithfulness and mercy.

God’s purposes are described variously by the five spokespersons:

These descriptions of God’s intentions are not mutually exclusive, but neither are they entirely compatible; e.g., safety for Israel seems to contradict division within Israel. Furthermore, the first readers of Luke–Acts would have known that Jesus never ruled Israel in a political sense (contrary to 1:32–33), but would have believed that he reigned as the risen Christ. Likewise, while the fall of the temple would seem to disprove Zechariah’s hopes for safety and peaceful worship (1:74–75, 77), those who follow Jesus have received God’s favor and peace (e.g., Acts 2:46–47; 4:33; 9:31). Thus, Luke’s authorized speakers deliver oracles that differ but are fulfilled within the narrative in some sense. ⁸ God is proved to be faithful, and the characters remain reliable witnesses to God’s actions.

God in the Ministries of John and Jesus (Luke 3:1–19:27)

John the Baptist, who is a Spirit-inspired speaker (1:15), joins Gabriel, Mary, Zechariah, and Simeon in declaring God’s purposes. The narrator begins John’s ministry with a statement that God’s word came to him, and with a quotation from Isaiah that identifies John as the voice in the wilderness; both validate John’s God-sent status (Luke 3:1–6). John predicts that God will come to save the descendants of Abraham, but not necessarily all of them (in contrast to Mary’s and Zechariah’s testimony). God’s wrath will destroy those who do not change their lives by doing good for the poor and opting out of oppressive imperial tactics (3:7–17).

Once Jesus begins his ministry, the narrator describes God’s actions less frequently, virtually ceding divine action to Jesus. The devil’s “if you are the Son of God” (4:3, 9) is trumped by Jesus’ “the Lord your God” (4:8, 12); God has authority over the devil, even if the devil does not acknowledge it. A crowd observing Jesus concludes that “God has visited his people” (7:16), an illustration of the crowd’s role throughout Luke: they praise God in response to Jesus’ actions, demonstrating that Jesus leads people to God. At the baptism and at the transfiguration, the narrator describes a voice from heaven (3:22) or from a cloud (9:35). Clearly this is God’s voice (because it states, “This is my Son”), but the narrator leaves unsaid what the audience understands; the focus remains on God’s validation of the status of Jesus. Thus, even the exceptions support the general rule: during Jesus’ ministry, he is the sole spokesperson for God.

Jesus makes a bold claim in 10:22: “All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal [God].” By this point in the narrative, this statement is literally true—only Jesus reveals God. The narrator continues to note that persons who have been healed and crowds who observe Jesus praise God, but only Jesus characterizes God, prays to God, quotes God (11:49), or voices God’s intentions (12:20). So thorough is this representation that once Jesus’ ministry begins, the only prayers Luke records are the ones Jesus speaks or narrates through characters in his parables.

Some parable characters may signify God: the fig tree owner (13:6–9), the owner of a missing sheep (15:3–7), the woman with a missing coin (15:8–10), and the father of two sons (15:11–32). But these characters are ambiguous, more certainly representing God’s purposes, less certainly God’s person. Combined, the figures signify the complicated relationship between divine judgment and the divine intent to seek the lost—and divine joy over those who repent. Judgment (12:8–9; 13:25), seeking the lost (5:32; 19:10), and joy over persons restored (10:21) are among Jesus’ actions, too; thus the fig tree owner who wants to cut down the unfruitful tree (13:7) and the gardener who asks for extra time to let it flourish (13:8–9) are together symbols for both God and Jesus.

The ministry of Jesus carries out God’s purposes, of which focal characters spoke earlier. In Luke 6, Jesus echoes Mary and John as he blesses the poor and pronounces woes on the rich (vv. 20–26). Jesus certainly divides his audiences, as Simeon predicted; some want to throw him off a cliff (4:28–29; cf. 6:11), while others hear him and praise God (e.g., 5:26; cf. 4:31–32; 7:16; 13:17). But no earlier focal speaker suggests that God’s plan includes Jesus’ death; only Moses and Elijah speak of it, and then only to Jesus (9:30–31). And so as Jesus “sets his face to go to Jerusalem” (9:51), only he and his Father fully comprehend the divine purpose. According to the narrator, Jesus’ followers are prevented from understanding it (9:45; 18:34). Because only the Son can reveal the Father (10:22), the disciples will remain confused until the Son opens their minds (24:45).

On his journey to Jerusalem, Jesus continues to interpret God’s purposes in ways that both agree and disagree with the earlier focal characters. Like Mary, for instance, Jesus emphasizes God’s intent to bless the poor and condemn the rich (6:20–26; cf. 1:51–53). Jesus, however, offers opportunities for the wealthy to repent, and at least one rich man, Zacchaeus, proves that God hopes to restore even the wealthy (19:8–10). Jesus insists that God’s purposes for him have been revealed in Scripture and will be fulfilled (11:49–51; 13:33; 18:31), and that Moses, the patriarchs, and the prophets all side with him (13:28; 16:19–31).

God in Jesus’ Time in Jerusalem (19:28–24:53)

Jesus remains the sole spokesperson for and about God during his time in Jerusalem, but as Jesus’ death nears, God once more intervenes, via the narrator and by means of indirect action. In some variants of the text, God sends an angel to Jesus as he prays on the Mount of Olives (22:43–44; although the originality of the text is debatable). ⁹ In the crucifixion scene God is (implicitly) the cause of the profound darkness, but by omitting Mark’s “from top to bottom,” (15:38) the narrator obscures God’s hand in the tearing of the temple veil (23:44–45). When the women go to the tomb, “two men in dazzling clothes” announce the resurrection (24:1–7). Following the pattern of indirection and the divine passive (e.g., Luke writes “voice from the cloud” rather than “the voice of God” in 9:35), the narrator does not directly state that these two men are angels; but Cleopas and his friend later state that the women reported “a vision of angels” (24:23).

Once Jesus enters Jerusalem, the temple leaders question his authority to speak for God (20:1–2) and keep looking for a way to kill him (19:47). Satan provides the means by possessing Judas (22:1–6), and the temple leaders then seize Jesus through Satan’s agency (22:53). This is a radical change from the birth narratives, which present the temple and its priests as God’s agents, and the change previews how the temple and its leaders will, for the most part, be the enemies of Jesus’ followers, and therefore of God’s plan, in Acts.

At the last supper, Jesus grants his Father’s kingdom to the disciples (22:28–30), tells Peter “Satan has demanded to sift all of you . . . but I have prayed for you” (vv. 31–32), and predicts that Isa 53:12 (“he was counted among the lawless”) must be fulfilled in him (Luke 22:37). This quotation, especially when paired with the citation of Isa 53:7–8 in Acts 8:32–33, indicates that very likely Luke understood Jesus’ death to have been predicted in Isaiah’s Servant Songs. These are the only two explicit citations by which Luke supports the claim—otherwise cast in general terms, without specific citation—that the crucifixion of the Messiah was predicted in Scripture (see also Luke 24:7, 25–27, 44–46; Acts 2:23; 13:27–29; 26:23). Clearly, Luke believed that God’s plan included the crucifixion of Jesus, because God revealed that plan in advance through “Moses and all the prophets.” Just as clearly, Luke preferred to foreground texts predicting God’s plan to resurrect the Messiah, as becomes plain in Acts (e.g., Acts 2:24–35; 13:30–37).

The two men at the tomb remind the women of Jesus’ predictions of his fate (Luke 24:6–7), while Jesus speaks of how God’s plan, which he predicted and Scripture revealed, has been and is being fulfilled (24:26, 44, 46–47). In this way, even though 24:5 uses the divine passive “he was raised [by God],” Luke’s resurrection narrative emphasizes what Jesus is doing more than what God has done. The point of view shifts again in Acts, which consistently speaks of the resurrection from God’s point of view (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 13:30; 17:31).

God in Acts 1–12

This section begins with a surprise: the narrator calls God “the Father” (1:4), echoing Jesus’ promise of the Spirit (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:7). The disciples’ question about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6) refers back to Luke 24:21, “[W]e had hoped [Jesus] was the one to redeem Israel,” and to the hopes expressed by Zechariah for salvation and safety for Abraham’s descendants (1:74–75, 77). Jesus informs them that God has set times for redemption, but his followers do not need to know when this is. Thus in the first eight verses of Acts, Jesus promises the Spirit to his followers and affirms the Father’s control of the future.

God does not speak in Acts 1–5, except within Scripture quotations that Peter offers in his speeches. The narrative reveals God by several means: through tongues of fire and the Spirit on Pentecost (2:1–4), by an earthquake (4:31), and by an angel (5:17–21). In these instances the narrator does not describe God acting but employs the familiar patterns of divine passives (“the place in which they were gathered together was shaken”; 4:31) and indirect description (“an angel of the Lord opened . . . [and] brought”; 5:19). In chapter 1, “the Lord” presumably caused the lot to fall for Matthias rather than Joseph (1:26), an ambiguous use of kyrios reminiscent of the Gospel (“Lord” here could refer to Jesus or God).

Acts 6–12 presents continually shifting protagonists—Stephen, Philip, Saul, then Peter. The narrator continues to speak indirectly of God’s activity, but one hardly notices, because these divine words and indirect actions are so numerous. Several times the Spirit acts or speaks (7:55; 8:29, 39; 10:19), and angels appear to Cornelius (10:3–7), to Peter (12:7–11), and, fatally, to Herod Agrippa I (12:23). Throughout, the narrator speaks of God’s activity obliquely; Stephen’s face “was like the face of an angel” (6:15), and “the word of God continued to advance” (6:7; 12:24).

Beginning in Acts 8:29, the narrator treats the Holy Spirit as a distinct character. Up to that point, the narrator mostly uses passive verbs to describe what the Spirit did or what God or Jesus did by means of the Spirit (“filled with the Spirit” or “rejoiced in the Spirit”); Simeon, for example, was “guided by the Spirit” (Luke 2:27) and Jesus “led by the Spirit” (4:1). But in Acts 8:29 and several times thereafter, the text records the Spirit’s voice (see 8:29; 10:19–20; 13:2), and describes the Spirit’s actions with active verbs: “the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away” (8:39), and “the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them” (16:7). The Spirit begins to function more like an angel or like Jesus in Luke’s Gospel.

God, According to Peter

Between Acts 1:15 and 12:17 Peter is God’s main interpreter, though the narrator occasionally describes what the Lord is doing (2:47; see also 11:21; cf. 12:24). ¹⁰ Only in Acts 6–9 do Stephen and Saul displace Peter as focal speaker. Peter’s speeches in Acts 2 and 3 emphasize God’s plan and cite specific Scriptures that predict certain aspects of it. The divine plan includes granting the Spirit (2:17–21, citing Joel 2:28–32); resurrecting the Messiah (2:24–31, citing Ps 16:8–11); seating Jesus at God’s right hand (2:34–35, citing Ps 110:1); appointing Jesus as eschatological judge (3:21–26, citing Deut 18:15–20); and the political authorities’ opposing Jesus and his followers (4:25–28, citing Ps 2:1–2). ¹¹

Peter’s speech to Cornelius is his only address to a Gentile and appropriately begins with a statement about God’s impartiality: anyone who “fears” God and does what is right is accepted (Acts 10:35), an echo of Mary’s characterization of God in Luke 1:50. God through Jesus is spreading the good news of peace (Acts 10:36), an echo of Zechariah (Luke 1:79) and the angels (2:14). According to Peter, God anointed Jesus with the Spirit, presumably at his baptism; enabled Jesus to heal those oppressed by the devil; raised Jesus from the dead; and ordained Jesus as the eschatological judge (Acts 10:38–42).

Peter’s characterization of God focuses almost entirely on what God did to and through Jesus. In the speeches Peter delivers in Acts 2, 3, and 10, Luke allows Peter to express a consistent relationship between God and Jesus: God anointed Jesus with the Spirit, did miracles through him, raised him, and made him Lord and Messiah. These divine actions fitting Jesus with Spirit, power, and new (exalted, royal) status as an adult stand in some tension with the way Gabriel earlier put things—Jesus is holy, the Son of God, born by the action of the Spirit and predicted to be Messiah even before his birth (Luke 1:31–35). Peter and Gabriel are both reliable speakers, but neither necessarily represents how Luke would describe his own Christology. Luke tolerates differences among those who speak for God, and it is unnecessary to harmonize Peter’s and Gabriel’s understandings of how God relates to Jesus, or to conclude that Luke is a careless theologian because they differ. ¹²

God, According to Stephen

Whereas Peter focuses mostly on God’s actions in Jesus’ life, Stephen focuses on God’s actions in Israel’s history. Stephen’s recitation of the history is somewhat tendentious: Moses was “abandoned” (Acts 7:21), and following the golden calf episode God “turned away” from the Israelites and “handed them over to worship the host of heaven” (v. 42). In a new point of emphasis, Stephen argues that God directed the construction of “the tent of testimony” but never approved the temple and has never lived in it (vv. 44–50). Stephen’s anti-temple rhetoric stands at odds with the positive ways in which Luke elsewhere describes the temple as a place of worship and prayer (esp. in Luke 1–2; 24:53; and Acts 1–4), but does agree with what Paul says in Acts 17:24–25.

Writing after the destruction of the temple, Luke does not need to take sides in a debate over whether the temple was ever part of God’s plan. Stephen’s death—his vision of God and Christ (7:55–56), his imitation of Jesus by forgiving his murderers (v. 60)—gives the narrator’s stamp of approval to Stephen, but Luke’s opinion about whether the temple was ordained by God is perhaps more nuanced. Jesus states that “the law and the prophets [were] until John” (Luke 16:16, my trans.), so perhaps Luke considers that the temple was temporarily part of God’s plan. Be that as it may, Stephen’s stark rejection of the temple and accusations of Israelite idolatry preview the second half of Acts, where leaders of both pagan temples and the Jerusalem shrine oppose Paul and the gospel.

God in Acts 13–28

In the second half of Acts, Paul emerges as God’s primary interpreter. In Acts 13–21, as in chs. 1–12, quite a few characters interpret God; in chs. 22–28, however, Paul is God’s sole interpreter (as Jesus was in Luke 4–24). In Acts 13–21 the narrator radically increases the frequency of descriptions of divine activity, using both active descriptions and divine passive forms, ¹³ as well as indirect expressions of divine activity (16:9, 25; 19:20; 21:4). The narrator of Acts 13–21 behaves more like one of the focal speakers in describing what the divine does or says, mostly to affirm and reaffirm Paul’s status.

God, According to Speakers Other than Paul

Some who speak for God agree with Paul and the narrator about God or God’s will. Barnabas joins Paul in a brief speech (14:15–17), and Peter briefly reappears to argue for Paul’s side at the Jerusalem council (15:7–11). Later a Pythian slave girl claims that Paul and Silas are slaves of the Most High God and declare a “way of salvation” (16:17), and a demon at Ephesus says he knows both Jesus and Paul (19:15). “Through the Spirit,” disciples at Tyre warn Paul not to proceed to Jerusalem (21:4), and Agabus then quotes the Holy Spirit to predict Paul’s arrest (21:10–11). Most other characters in these chapters are clearly at odds with the perspectives of Paul and the narrator: crowds at Lystra say, “The gods have come down to us in human form!” (14:11); in Jerusalem Judeans and Pharisees insist that God will not save those who are not circumcised and obedient to the Law (15:1, 5); and at Ephesus several characters, countering Paul’s theological convictions, defend worship of Artemis (19:23–35).

James the brother of Jesus, who speaks solo in 15:13–21 and with the elders in 21:17–25, is a more ambiguous character, and deserves closer attention. He receives passing mention in Acts 12:17, in an odd sort of hand-off from Peter. The narrator does not clarify how or when James assumed leadership at Jerusalem, nor where he fits in the group of “apostles and elders.” At the council, Peter states that God chose him to be first to evangelize the Gentiles and that God’s gift of the Spirit made God’s approval of the Gentiles absolutely clear (15:7–11). Readers know this agrees with the narrative of Acts 10 and with the judgment of the Jerusalem group in 11:18. Thus, the narrative supports Peter’s accusation in 15:10 that “you” (presumably the believing “Pharisees” mentioned in v. 5) are now testing God and resonates with what Jesus told the devil: one must avoid putting God to the test (Luke 4:12).

James, for his part, agrees that God has decided to bring salvation to the Gentiles, and in support of that view quotes God’s oracle in Amos 9:11–12 (in Acts 15:16–18). But Luke does not portray James in the same way he does the others. Acts does not affirm that James is filled with the Spirit when he declares, “Therefore I have reached the decision that we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God, but we should write to them [by letter].” The council’s letter includes the line “[i]t has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us” (15:28), but the narrator lets that claim hang without any support. In James’ last appearance in Acts, he and the elders hear Paul’s report and praise God, but then advise Paul to make a public display in the temple of his obedience to the Law. They also repeat the content of the letter, recalling that “we have sent a letter with our judgment that [Gentiles] should abstain . . .” (21:25). Again, there is no reference to divine guidance for the letter or for their proposal for Paul’s public piety—a strategy that ends in disaster.

Does Luke consider James an approved speaker for God? He certainly does not provide James with the layers of divine confirmation that he gives Paul—no “call” narrative, no miracles, no confirming visions. Paul and Peter agree that God requires only faith from the Gentiles. Stephen, Paul, and Peter agree that the Law has proven impossible for Israel to obey (7:53; 13:39; 15:10). Moreover, Peter’s accusation of “testing” God (15:10) agrees with the flow of previous chapters. On balance, therefore, it seems likely that Luke thought James was at least partially mistaken about God’s will and purposes (i.e., apart from his Scripture-warranted affirmation of Gentile inclusion in God’s people). However, part of Luke’s narrative strategy is to allow James to speak his position on God’s will without direct criticism.

God, According to Paul

Paul is the final authorized speaker for God in Luke–Acts, and Luke takes pains to make certain that his testimony about God is validated in multiple ways, to a degree surpassed in Luke–Acts only by Jesus. “The Lord” twice appears to Paul to encourage him when he is in danger (18:9–10; 23:11), and Paul describes a third appearance while he was praying in the temple (22:17–21). Paul’s conversion story appears once (in 9:1–19), and then is retold twice (22:4–16; 26:9–18). In all, counting the retellings, “the Lord” appears to Paul six times in Acts. Just as Jesus’ fate is one of the narrative threads in Luke—predicted, then realized, and then interpreted—Paul’s fate, from Acts 9 forward, is one of the continuous threads in Acts. Jesus predicted his own death multiple times in Luke, but in Acts “the Lord” predicts Paul’s fate (9:15–16, addressed to Ananias; 18:9–10; 21:11, Agabus’ quotation of the Holy Spirit; 23:11; cf. the angel’s message recalled by Paul in 27:23–24).

Thus, Paul’s descriptions of God’s nature, will, and activities are of high value to Luke. Paul makes some claim about God in each of nine speeches. To Gentile audiences in 14:8–18 and 17:22–31, Paul emphasizes God as the living Creator who cannot be represented by images, who does not live in shrines, and who provides self-references in natural processes. Both speeches point to divine patience with Gentile confusion about God, but the Athenian speech declares that this patience has now ended with God’s raising and exaltation of Jesus (17:30–31); it is now time for all people to repent (a motif that also appears in speech by Jesus [e.g., Luke 13:1–5; 24:47] and Peter [e.g., Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31]). The anti-idolatry and anti-shrine themes connect Paul to Stephen (7:42–43, 47–50), but more important, their necessity is illustrated by the accounts of Gentile religion-as-superstition in Acts 14 and 19. Speaking to Jewish audiences, Paul sounds like a blend of Peter and Stephen, combining Stephen’s tendentious review of biblical history with Peter’s focus on the life, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus as fulfilling God’s plan and purpose. Like Peter, Paul can also point to having seen the risen Lord, and so to firsthand knowledge of God’s behavior in his own life. Especially in the “defense” speeches, Paul returns to the theme of the “God of our ancestors,” which both Peter and Stephen emphasize but Paul expresses even more emphatically.

God in Luke–Acts: A Composite Picture

Throughout shifts in geography, leadership, and cultures, God is a stable character in Luke–Acts. God is the God of Israel, the focus of the lives of pious Jews. At the end of Acts, although Paul announces that God is sending the gospel to the Gentiles, he also emphatically states that he has not transgressed “the customs of our ancestors” (28:17). Yet God is also the God of all peoples, who shows no partiality towards any nation, who can be sought and found by anyone. God is aniconic and does not live in shrines, including the one in Jerusalem, and this message causes conflict wherever the gospel spreads.

Luke’s use of “Lord” for Jesus and for God means that the two characters, while not completely merging in Acts, are almost synonymous. Once Jesus ascends, he is described as at the right hand of God, sitting (2:34) or standing (7:55–56). Thus, “the Lord” can be the object of prayer and can appear in visions without any need to specify which character is meant; their proximity to each other, their mutual knowledge (Luke 10:22), and God’s actions in handing over to Jesus the kingdom (Luke 22:29) and the day of judgment (Acts 10:42; 17:31) combine to explain why Luke felt it unnecessary to distinguish God from Jesus in Acts. It also helps explain why Luke can have Jesus address God as “Father” and talk to his followers about “your Heavenly Father,” yet avoid having Jesus’ followers do so. During Jesus’ ministry, Luke could accurately depict Jesus and his Father as two characters and show Jesus in prayer to the Father; after the ascension, it appears, prayers to “the Lord” seem a more appropriate narrative technique for constantly emphasizing the exalted place of Jesus in the divine realm. Beginning in Acts 8, following the last mention of Christ at God’s right hand (7:55–56), the Holy Spirit takes on more aspects of a separate character, who can speak, act, and be present in places other than God’s throne room.

The God of Luke–Acts has a plan that can be discovered in the Scriptures, through angelic visits, through visions, by casting lots, and most importantly, through the voices of Spirit-inspired focal characters. These speak definitively of what God wills, in ways not always consistent with each other, and that often require special knowledge to interpret. God’s will is to draw Gentiles into “repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus” (Acts 20:21), and Luke lets us witness how the early church differed on the questions of circumcision and obedience to Torah. It would seem that Luke believed God approved of the Torah-free approach represented by Peter and Paul over the compromise position represented by James. But Luke–Acts includes nothing from Jesus or the narrator abrogating parts of Torah, and the narrator refrains from vilifying the “circumcision” wing of the movement. Luke works hard to portray the Christian faith as consistent with the best traditions of Israel and with the will of Israel’s God.