John Calvin Commentary Acts 1

So that he may move on to those things which followed Christ's ascension, he briefly gathers the sum of all those things which he had previously handled in the former book, so that he may connect this to it. And he briefly sets down this description of the history of the gospel: that it is a narration of those things which Christ did and said as long as He lived on earth.

Furthermore, while it is commonly interpreted that Christ first had purity of life before He began to preach, this is irrelevant to Luke’s meaning. It is true that the conduct of a good and godly teacher ought to be such that he speaks first with his life, then with his tongue; otherwise, he would be no different from an actor.

But Luke refers rather to what he had said near the end of his gospel (Luke 24:19), namely, that Christ was a prophet mighty in deed and word—that is, one who excelled no less in deeds than in words, although there is little difference between these two passages.

For the mightiness of works commended there belongs to His miracles, but this phrase, to do, in my opinion, reaches further. Specifically, under it are comprehended all the famous acts characteristic of His ministry, in which His death and resurrection are the chief.

For the office of the Messiah did not only consist in doctrine, but it was also necessary that He should make peace between God and man, that He should be a Redeemer of the people, a restorer of the kingdom, and an author of everlasting blessedness. All these things, I say, as they were promised concerning the Messiah, so were they expected from Him.

Now we see that the sum of the gospel consists of these two parts: namely, Christ's doctrine and His acts. This is because He not only brought to men the message entrusted to Him by His Father, but also performed all things that could be required of the Messiah.

He began His kingdom, He pacified God with His sacrifice, He purged man’s sins with His own precious blood, He subdued death and the devil, He restored us to true liberty, and He purchased righteousness and life for us. And so that whatever He either did or said might be certain, He proved Himself by miracles to be the Son of God.

So this phrase, to do, also extends to His miracles, but it must not be restricted only to them. Here we must note that those who only have a bare knowledge of the history do not have the gospel, unless the knowledge of the doctrine which reveals the fruits of Christ's acts is added to it.

For this is a holy bond which no one may dissolve. Therefore, whenever Christ's doctrine is mentioned, let us learn to add His works to it, as seals by which its truth is established and confirmed, and its effect declared.

Furthermore, so that we may benefit from His death and resurrection, and also that miracles may have their use, we must always pay attention to Him who speaks. For this is the true rule of Christianity.

Regarding the phrase Of all things which He began, I do not greatly dislike the interpretation some give: that Luke said 'of all' rather than 'all,' because it is possible to discuss Christ's works and doctrine to some extent, but to set down the whole course, so that the narration might be perfect, would be a matter of great difficulty.

Just as John declares that the world could not contain the books (John 21:25), it is also to be noted that Luke says he began his history at the beginning of Christ's works.

But as soon as he has declared Christ's nativity, he passes over to the twelfth year of His age (Luke 2:42), and after he had briefly spoken of His disputation in the temple with the doctors, passing over eighteen years without saying anything about them, he begins the actual narration of Christ's works.

It is, therefore, clear that only those works and sayings which contribute to the sum of our salvation are noted in this place.

For after Christ appeared in the world clothed in our flesh, He lived privately at home until He was thirty years of age, at which time His Father appointed Him to a different public role. God wanted Him to lead the former part of His life obscurely, so that the knowledge of these things which edify our faith might be more excellent.

Regarding The former speech, it seemed good to me to translate this in this way, because λογον ποιεισθὰι is the same for the Greeks as verba facere, or 'to speak,' is for the Latins, as Budaeus notes. And we must understand the contrast of the second part, which he undertakes, so that we may know that the evangelist resolved anew to write, having new material to write about.

Even until that day. Therefore, the ascension of Christ is the end of the history of the gospel. For he has ascended, Paul says, that he might fulfill all things (Ephesians 4:10). Our faith gathers other fruit from it, but it will be sufficient to note here that our redemption was fully complete and finished when Christ ascended to his Father.

Therefore, Luke fully performed his duty in this narration, concerning the doctrine and works of Christ. And he is said to be taken up so that we may know that he has truly departed from this world, lest we should consent to the foolish notions of those who think that in his ascension no change of place was made.

Commandment by the Holy Ghost. Luke shows in these words that Christ did not so depart from the world that he no longer cared for us; for since he has ordained a perpetual government in his Church, he thereby declares that he took care to provide for our salvation. Yes, he has promised that he will be present with his own to the end (Matthew 28:20), just as, indeed, he is always present through his ministers.

Luke, therefore, shows us that Christ no sooner departed from here than he immediately provided for the government of his Church, from which we may gather that he is careful for our salvation. And Paul has plainly noted this providence of his in the passage recently cited, when he says, That he has fulfilled all things, making some apostles, some evangelists, some pastors, etc.

But these commandments, which the evangelist says Christ gave to his disciples, I interpret as referring to the preaching of the gospel; just as ambassadors are usually instructed with certain precepts before they go on their embassy, lest they should rashly attempt anything contrary to the will and mind of him who sends them.

And all this is spoken in praise of the doctrine which the apostles taught. So that this may appear more clearly, each point is to be noted in its order. First of all, he says they were elect and chosen by Christ, so that we may be certain of their calling to that function.

Neither does he here set God’s election against man’s merits, but only affirms that they were raised up by God, and that they did not rashly take this function upon themselves. It is true, indeed, that they were freely chosen; but now we must inquire what Luke’s main point is here.

I say that his only concern is that we may be certain of the apostles' calling, so that we may learn not to pay regard to men, but to the Son of God, its author, because this must always be a maxim in the Church: that no one should usurp any honor.

Secondly, he says that they were instructed by Christ what they should do. As if to say, that they did not utter their own inventions, but sincerely and faithfully delivered what was commanded them by their heavenly Master. And so that what Christ taught them might be more revered, he adds this: that this was done by the direction of the Holy Ghost.

Not because the Son of God needed to be guided by any other, who is eternal wisdom, but because he was also man, lest anyone should think that he delivered to his disciples those things which he delivered by human intellect and reason, he expressly calls us back to the divine authority.

Just as the Lord himself so often affirms that he taught nothing but what he had received from his Father; and therefore he says, that his doctrine was not his own. Therefore, he signifies that in the preaching of the gospel there is nothing which issues from the human mind, but that it is the divine ordinance of the Spirit, to which the whole world must be subject.

Unto whom, etc. He adds this so that he might cause the resurrection to be believed, as something most necessary to know, and without which the whole gospel falls flat, nor does any faith remain. And, to omit speaking of other disadvantages that arise from ignorance of Christ's resurrection, the gospel loses its whole authority unless we know and are also fully persuaded that Christ, being alive, speaks to us from heaven.

To this, Luke has primary regard in this place. Therefore, so that the truth of this might not be called into question, he says that it was proved by many signs and tokens. What Erasmus, following an old interpreter, calls arguments, I have translated as proofs. For Aristotle, in the first book of his Rhetorics, calls that τεκμηριον which is a necessary proof among signs.

This, therefore, is what I said before: that Christ made his resurrection manifest to his apostles by evident tokens, which served as necessary proofs, so that they would not doubt it. Furthermore, he does not list those tokens and signs, except that he says that Christ frequently appeared to them over a period of about a month and a half.

If he had appeared to them only once, it might have been somewhat suspicious; but by showing himself so often to them, he dissolves all doubts that might arise in their minds. In this way, he also removes the reproach of the ignorance that he said was in the apostles, lest it discredit their preaching.

He treats of the kingdom of God. He tells us again that the apostles themselves were well taught before they undertook to teach others; therefore, whatever things they uttered and brought to light, either by word or by writing, concerning the kingdom of God, are the very words that Christ himself uttered.

And in this way he briefly sets forth the purpose of the doctrine of the gospel: namely, that God may reign in us. Regeneration is the beginning of this kingdom, and its end is blessed immortality; the intermediate stages consist of a fuller progression and increase of regeneration.

But for this to appear more clearly, we must first note that we are born and live as aliens and strangers to the kingdom of God, until God fashions us anew to a new life. Therefore, we may properly contrast the world, the flesh, and whatever is in human nature with the kingdom of God, as opposed to it.

For the natural person is wholly occupied with the things of this world and seeks happiness here; meanwhile, we are, as it were, banished from God, and He likewise from us. But Christ, by the preaching of the gospel, lifts us up to the contemplation of the life to come.

And so that he may better bring this about, he reforms all our earthly affections, and so, having stripped us of the vices of our flesh, he separates us from the world.

And, just as eternal death is prepared for all those who live after the flesh, so, inasmuch as the inner person is renewed in us, so that we may advance in the spiritual life, we draw nearer to the perfection of the kingdom of God, which is fellowship in the glory of God.

Therefore, God will reign in and among us now, so that he may at last make us partakers of his kingdom.

From this we gather that Christ principally treated of the corruption of mankind; of the tyranny of sin, whose bond-slaves we are; of the curse and guilt of eternal death, to which we all are subject; and also of the means to obtain salvation; of the remission of sins; of the denying of the flesh; of spiritual righteousness; of the hope of eternal life; and of similar such matters.

And if we wish to be rightly instructed in Christianity, we must apply our studies to these things.

Gathering them together, he commanded, etc. They had previously performed the duties of Apostles, but that lasted only a short time. Secondly, it was to the extent that by their preaching they might awaken the Jews to hear their Master. And so that commandment to teach, which Christ had given them (Matthew 10:7) while he lived with them on earth, was, as it were, a certain entrance into their apostleship which was to come, for which they were not yet ready.

Therefore, their ordinary function was not laid upon them until Christ had risen again. Instead, they stirred up their nation (as I have said) like criers, so that they might give ear to Christ. And then finally, after the resurrection, they were made Apostles to publish throughout the whole world the doctrine that was committed to them.

And although after they were made Apostles, Christ still commanded them to abstain from their office, this was done for good reason; indeed, many reasons can be given why it should be so. That despicable forsaking of their Master was still fresh; many signs and indications of unbelief were still fresh.

Since they had been so thoroughly taught and had so suddenly forgotten everything, they showed a clear sign of their great dullness of mind. Nor were they free from sluggishness, which could not be properly purged in any other way than by delaying the promised grace, so that he might sharpen their desire all the more.

But this reason is especially to be noted: the Lord appointed a specific time for the sending of the Spirit, so that the miracle might be more apparent. Again, he allowed them to rest for a while, so that he might better display the greatness of the work he was about to entrust to them. And in this way, the truth of the gospel is confirmed, because the Apostles were forbidden to begin preaching it until they were well prepared in due time.

And they were commanded to stay together, because they were all to have one Spirit given to them. If they had been dispersed, this unity would not have been so well known. Though they were scattered afterwards in various places, yet because they brought what they had received from one and the same source, it was just as if they had always spoken with one voice. Furthermore, it was fitting that they should begin to preach the gospel at Jerusalem, so that the prophecy might be fulfilled:

“There shall a law go out of Zion,
and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem” (Isaiah 2:3).

Although the participle συναλιζομενος can be translated in various ways, Erasmus's translation pleased me most, because the meaning of gathering together will agree better with the context.

They should wait for the promise. It was fitting that these men, who would shortly after lay Christ’s yoke upon the neck of the world, should first be accustomed to obey. And surely, by their example, they have taught us that we must work and rest only at the Lord’s pleasure.

For if, during our life, we wage spiritual warfare under his banner and leadership, surely he ought to have no less authority over us than any earthly captain has in his army. Therefore, as military discipline requires that no one should engage in battle unless commanded by the captain, so it is not lawful for us either to go out or to attempt anything until the Lord gives the command.

And as soon as he sounds the retreat, we must halt. Moreover, we are taught that we become partakers of God’s gifts through hope.

But we must note the nature of hope as it is described in this place. For that is not hope which everyone devises for himself rashly, but that hope which is grounded on the promise of God. Therefore Christ does not allow his apostles to look for whatever they want, but he expressly adds the promise of the Father.

Furthermore, he makes himself a witness of it, because we ought to be so sure and certain that even if all the forces of hell oppose us, yet this conviction should remain firmly fixed in our minds: that we have believed God. As Paul says, I know whom I have believed (2 Timothy 1:12). And here he reminds them of those things which are written in John 14:15-16:

“I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may continue with you; I say the Spirit of truth,” etc.

Again,

“I have spoken these things to you while I am with you. And the Spirit, whom my Father shall send in my name, shall teach you all things” (John 14:25–26), etc.

And again,

“When the Spirit of truth shall come, whom I will send from my Father, he shall bear witness of me” (John 15:26).

And again,

“If I shall go hence, I will send you the Comforter, who shall reprove the world” (John 16:7).

And he had said long before,

“He who believes in me, out of his belly
shall flow rivers of living water” (John 7:38).

Because John truly, Christ repeats this to his apostles from John’s own words. For some of them had heard from John’s mouth what the Evangelists report: I truly baptize you with water, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. Now Christ declares that they will indeed perceive that what he said is true.

Furthermore, this greatly serves to confirm the preceding sentence, for it is an argument drawn from the office of Christ. And it is as follows: John was sent to baptize with water; he fulfilled his function as befitted a servant of God. The Son of God is sent to baptize with the Holy Ghost; it remained, therefore, for him to do his duty.

Nor can it be otherwise than that he must do what his Father has commanded him to do, and for which he also came down to the earth. But it seems a very absurd thing to restrict that to the visible sending of the Holy Ghost, which was spoken universally of regeneration.

I answer that Christ did not then only baptize with the Holy Ghost when he sent him in the form of fiery tongues; for he had baptized his apostles before this, and he baptizes all the elect thus daily. But because the sending of the Holy Ghost in so glorious a manner was a token of the hidden grace with which he daily inspires his elect, he fitly applies to it the testimony of John.

And truly, this was as if it had been the common baptism of the Church. For besides the fact that the apostles did not receive the Spirit for themselves only, but for the use of all the faithful, the universal favor of Christ towards his Church was also declared when he poured out upon it the gifts of his Spirit in great abundance.

Although, therefore, he daily baptizes the elect of his Father, yet this was no hindrance to his showing forth this token to be remembered above all others, so that the apostles might know that they had only been initiated by John; and that not in vain, since their perfection was near at hand.

And what some most commonly gather from this passage is frivolous—namely, that the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ were different. For he is not disputing here about baptism, but only makes a comparison between the person of John and the person of Christ.

When John said that he baptized with water only, he was not defining the nature of his baptism, but who he himself was, lest he should claim for himself what was proper to Christ. Likewise, ministers in these days ought not to speak otherwise of themselves; they must acknowledge Christ as the author of all those things which they prefigure in the outward baptism, and leave nothing to themselves except only the outward administration.

For when these titles are attributed to baptism—namely, that it is the laver of regeneration (Titus 3:5), a washing away of sins, the fellowship of death and burying with Christ (Romans 6:4), and a grafting into the body of Christ—it is not declared what man, being the minister of the outward sign, does, but rather what Christ does, who alone gives force and efficacy to the signs. We must always hold firmly to this distinction, lest, while we honor man too much, we detract from Christ.

But here a question may be raised why he names John here rather than any other:

1. It is clear enough that John professed himself to be the minister of the outward sign, namely, of water, and that Christ was the author of the spiritual baptism.
2. Because it was fitting that John should decrease and Christ increase.
3. Because the apostles esteemed John so highly (John 3:30), it might have been that the glory of Christ could have been obscured thereby.

Therefore, Christ, so that he might reclaim them to himself, tells them that John only ministered to them the external baptism. Nevertheless, he also confirms them, lest they should doubt the promise. For they attributed very much to John, and therefore they were persuaded that the baptism they had received from him was not in vain. Now, if its truth and force must be looked for from Christ, then the apostles ought to hope that what John prefigured will surely be fulfilled.

So, in like manner, we must think that we are not baptized in vain with water by men, because Christ, who commanded this to be done, will fulfill his office and baptize us with the Spirit. So faith draws a consequence from the outward sign to the inward effect; yet it does not attribute any more than is fitting either to the sign or to its minister, because in the sign it only looks to the promise, which is Christ’s, and acknowledges him as the only author of grace.

Let us, therefore, adopt such a balanced approach that we in no way diminish Christ’s honor; and yet, nevertheless, let us hope for that fruit from our baptism which is noted in this passage. By assigning so short a time, our Savior makes them more joyful in their hope. From which it follows that that death was not to be lamented which so promptly brought with it such precious fruit.

And let us also note this: that this word ‘baptism’ is used improperly in this passage, so that the contrast may be complete. In the same way, Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans (Romans 3:26), after he has set down the law of works, so that the contrary may correspond, uses ‘the law of faith’ for faith itself.