Joel 3:15 (MT and LXX) in Acts 2:1721

Trevor Peterson September 29, 1998

1 Introduction
Peters use of Joel 31 in Acts 2:1721 raises some important questions, not the least of which are the pneumatological and eschatological implications. When faced with accusations concerning the behavior of the disciples on Pentecost, he cites this passage to explain what is happening. The phrasing of this is that might lead a reader to conclude that the events of Pentecost constitute a direct fulfillment of Joels prophecy, which raises its own set of questions about how they then relate to the Day of Yahweh. The significance of these theological questions can tend to color a readers perception of the passage, so that he sees only what his particular eschatological view will allow. As such, although this passage has been often interpreted, it is a vitally important chapter to evaluate from a thoroughly exegetical perspective, leaving aside as much as is humanly possible whatever theological preconceptions may normally accompany the interpreter. In an effort to do this very thing, the following consideration will begin with the OT context, progress to the NT context, establish some relevant questions to be answered, and only then turn to the literature that is available on this subject, to draw some tentative conclusions.

2 English Translation of Joel 3:15 in the MT

1 And it will happen afterward
1

that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy; your

What English versions label as 2:2832, the MT and LXX both make into a separate chap. 3, still consisting of five verses. Thus, the English chap. 3 is actually chap. 4. Throughout this paper, since the major concern is with the LXX and MT, and since they are in agreement, the chapters and verses cited will follow the four-chapter division of Joel.

old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. 2 And in those days I will pour out my spirit even upon the male servants and upon the female servants. 3 And I will give wonders in the heavens and on the earth: blood and fire and columns of smoke. 4 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the great and fearsome day of Yahweh comes. 5 And it will happen that everyone who calls upon the name of Yahweh will be delivered, for there will be those who escape on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, just as Yahweh said, and those whom Yahweh calls among the survivors.

3 English Translation of Joel 3:15 in the LXX

it will happen after these things that I will pour out from my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy, and your old men will dream dreams, and your young men will see visions. 2 And in those days I will pour out from my spirit upon the male servants and upon the female servants. 3 And I will give wonders in heaven, and on the earth blood and fire and vapor of smoke. 4 The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes. 5 And it will happen that whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved, because there will be one who is saved on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, as the Lord said, and those who bear good news to whomever the Lord calls.
1 And

4 Textual Variations between Acts 2:1721 and Joel 3:15 in the LXX
The quote in Acts 2 appears to follow very closely the LXXenough so that it can be presumed that either Peter or Luke had in mind, and perhaps in front of him in the latter case, the text of the LXX. There are some minor changes, however, which are worth considering. In v. 17 Luke replaces with , a term with considerable prophetic significance in both the LXX and the NT. It describes the timing of what Jacob prophesies concerning his sons (Gen 49:1) and of what Balaam prophesies concerning Moab (Num 24:14). In Prov 31:26, it parts from the MT to describe the future time demanding readiness of the virtuous woman. 2

In Deut 31:29 and Josh 24:27 it describes the timing of Israels future rebellion, but again its appearance in the latter passage does not reflect the explicit wording of the MT. It refers to the future time of Israels invasion by Gog (Ezek 38:16), of her repentance out of captivity (Deut 4:30; Hos 3:5), of her national blessing (Isa 2:2; Mic 4:1), of justice enacted upon her enemies (Jer 23:20; 37:24), and of Elams restoration (Jer 25:19). In Dan 2:28 it describes the timing of the events in Nebuchadnezzars dream. Vv. 29, 45 use it similarly, but independently from the MT. In Dan 10:14 it describes the time to which Daniels vision of the kings of the South and the North refers. Again, Dan 11:20 parts from the MT in repeating this association. In the NT, it refers to the time of Christs coming (Heb 1:2), a time of wickedness (2 Tim 3:1) and skepticism (2 Pet 3:3), and a time of judgment on the wicked (Jas 5:3). It seems, therefore, that Peter is drawing this description out of the context of Joel. He may find some correlation between 2:111 and the invasion of Gog described in Ezekiel 38. In 2:1217 the prophet calls the people to repentance, which would in fact happen in the last days according to Deut 4:30 and Hos 3:5. In 2:1819, 2127 he promises blessing and prosperity as a result of their renewed relationship with God, and in 2:20 he promises judgment upon Israels enemies. Knowing that these things precede chap. 3, Peter apparently recognizes the timing as in the last days and sums up the setting with this familiar prophetic term. In this same section he inserts before , probably reflecting Joel 2:27 which precedes this passage, again filling in the gap for his audience that the speaker is Yahweh your God. He goes on to transpose with , possibly reflecting a unique emphasis on the role of the disciples as young men. But it may be merely a slight variation in quoting from memory, with no purpose at all. The only other variation in v. 17 is a replacement of with and does not appear to alter its function as the object of . In v. 18 Peter inserts before , which may reflect the of the MT but does not appear to be significant. He also inserts before and before , possibly following a variant reading of the LXX, but again without significantly altering the thrust of the passage.2 None of the variants in v. 19 seem significant to Peters basic underL. C. L. Brenton, The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (Hendrickson, 1986) 1083, following primarily the codices Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, includes before , which certainly allows that there could have been a manuscript to match Lukes reading.
2

standing. His insertion of before and of before merely emphasizes the directions already conveyed by and . His insertion of before may reflect an understanding, similar to that exhibited in the accenting of the MT, that does not refer exclusively to the earthly signs but may include both.

5 Context of Joel 3
The context of Joel 3 is one of diverted judgment. Having opened the book with a lament over a recent locust plague, the Prophet takes an opportunity to relate this virtual invasion to a future invasion by a northern army, which will coincide with the impending Day of Yahweh (2:110). This is an army carrying out Yahwehs own will and judgment upon Israel (v. 11), and the people are called to repent before it comes (vv. 1217). If they do, He may relent from this approaching doom (v. 14) and have mercy on the land (v. 18). Instead of judgment, they will experience blessing and prosperity, and their enemies will be turned back (vv. 1926). Their relationship with Yahweh will be restored, and they will never be ashamed (v. 27). It is after these things that the events in question will take place, so the setting is one of future restoration and blessing, following national repentance. As presented in Joel, it is possible that this will all precede the fruition of judgment which makes the Day of Yahweh great and fearsome (2:11; 3:4).3 This is, in fact, his intent, as he calls the people to repentance. The same theme continues into chap. 4, as Yahweh promises to judge Israels enemies in the valley of Jehoshaphat (vv. 116). Apparently,
is used with the infinitive construct on eight occasions in the MT to indicate that something precedes a particular action. In Gen 13:10 it indicates that the valley of the Jordan was well watered before Yahweh destroyed Sodom. In Gen 36:31 and 1 Chr 1:43 it describes the Edomite kings who reigned before any king reigned in Israel. In the other five instances, it is used specifically with the infinitive construct of .In 1 Sam 9:15 Samuel receives a revelation before Saul comes. In 2 Sam 3:35 David refuses to eat before the sun comes down. In Ezek 33:22 the hand of Yahweh is upon the prophet before the refugees come. In Mal 3:23 Elijah will be sent before the great and awesome day of Yahweh comes. This last instance is particularly significant, since it is an identical construction to that found in Joel 3:4. The thrust is quite similar in that Elijah will be sent to draw the people to repentance and prevent divine judgment upon the land, while in Joel the whole context is directed at what might happen if the people repent, to stay the coming of the great and fearsome Day of Yahweh. This is, in fact, the only place outside of Joel where the Day of Yahweh is described as . It seems unlikely then, from all of these uses, that here with the infinitive construct means anything other than chronological precedence.
3

this judgment will take some military form, since they are told to prepare for war (vv. 910). The prophet closes with familiar blessing motifs: the supremacy of Jerusalem (v. 17); wine, milk, and plentiful water (v. 18); permanent desolation of enemies (v. 19); permanent habitation of Jerusalem (v. 20); and final justice (v. 21).

6 Context of Acts 2:1721

The context of Acts 2 has some significant differences from that in which Joel 3 is set, but also some intriguing similarities. Luke opens the book with a discussion of Jesus final days with His disciples and His ascension from Mt. Olivet (1:112). At this time, He instructs them to wait in Jerusalem for the baptism of the Holy Spirit in a few days (vv. 45). He refuses to tell them when He will establish the kingdom (vv. 67) but reminds them again that the Holy Spirit will come upon them, and that they will be His witnesses throughout the world (v. 8). In 1:1326, the disciples do return to Jerusalem and choose a replacement for Judas. They gather together for Pentecost and experience the filling of the Holy Spirit, speaking in other languages so that people gathered in Jerusalem from all over the world hear God being praised in their own native tongues (vv. 112). Some do mock, however, accusing the disciples of being drunk (v. 13), so Peter begins to explain what they are experiencing (v. 14). He denies that they are drunk, citing the time of day as his first objection (v. 15). He then declares this to be that spoken through the prophet Joel and proceeds to cite Joel 3 with the changes noted above (vv. 1621). Following the citation, he launches into a discussion of Jesuss death, resurrection, and exaltation to the right hand of the Father, from whom He has received and is pouring forth the Holy Spirit (vv. 2235). Peter finishes by explaining that this outpouring and the other elements he has mentioned in his message are evidence that the Jesus they have crucified is both Lord and Christ (v. 36). Clearly, the restoration of the kingdom was on the disciples minds during this time, as their questions to Jesus show. And when they asked, He turned their attention instead to the promise He had already given of the Holy Spirit Who would be poured out upon them. There was also a clear sense of impending judgment that the crowd rightly embraced, realizing the significance of Jesuss crucifixion (2:37). They knew that something needed to be done, and Peter advised repentance as their only valid response, so that their sins would be forgiven and they could receive this gift 5

of the Holy Spirit (v. 38). The intention of this response was that they might be saved from this crooked generation (v. 40), calling to mind not only their own perilous situation but also reminiscent of Israels condition at the time of Joels prophecy, in need of repentance to forestall the vengeful Day of Yahweh. On the other hand, when Peter cites Joel he makes no statement regarding widespread prophecy, the heavenly and earthly signs, or even explicit mention of the Day of Yahweh. It may be possible to conclude that he had in mind some of these things as finding their fulfillment at this time, but the text does not say.

7 Problems and Issues

Thus, the reader is faced with the task of discerning what Peter might have meant by citing Joel 3. Most of the textual differences are relatively insignificant to the theological issues and can be explained easily enough as slight variations in the LXX manuscript being used, instances of quoting from memory, or minor shifts in emphasis. There is one, howeverthe first variation in the passagethat requires more careful consideration. seems to be a deliberate replacement on the part of Peter or Luke for .4 If so, it probably reflects a strengthened association with the broader context of Joels prophecy, where the details given do correlate quite well with a number of themes normally associated with the last days. Thus, the first issue to be considered is the degree to which the context of Joel is implicit in Peters citation. Another consideration is the intent of Peters introductory statement: . If he was indicating a literal, prophetic fulfillment of Joels prophecy as cited here, was it meant to be entirely contained within the Pentecost event, to extend to the circumstances surrounding the death and resurrection of Christ, or to persist into the future, and how far? If he did not intend to indicate an actual fulfillment, what was his purpose in bringing up the prophecy? Was it merely to exemplify the idea of outpouring, of speaking in tongues, of divine revelation, or some combination of such things? And if he only had one basic point to make out of Joels message, why cite an entire chapter of context while
It is possible, however, that this was a legitimate reading from some extant LXX manuscript at that time. Of 18 occurrences in the LXX, five are unparalleled in the MT. It could very well be that this same interpretive trend was more actively pursued in some manuscripts than in others.
4

merely summing up the larger context with an inserted phrase? Most of the theological concerns come out of these questions. Was the outpouring at Pentecost the beginning of ongoing revelation throughout the Church age and into the Millennium? Was the Day of Yahweh being fulfilled at the time of Peters message? Was there prophetic content implicit in the tongues-speaking of the disciples? Having considered the context of each passage, it is now possible to evaluate some of the interpretations suggested in current literature.

8 Scholarship
Longenecker says that Peters sermon on the day of Pentecost begins with the assertion that the last days are being actualized now.5 He does not explain that this assertion is somewhat less than clear, since Peter never explicitly says more than that some aspect of the prophecy can be seen in the days events. But this oversight is attributable in part to his belief that the clause, this is that, entails a pesher theme of fulfillment, which again he does little to support.6 In his commentary on Acts, he expands his comments to explain that Peter was indicating an inauguration of the Messianic Age, perhaps not understanding the physical signs but at least expecting them to come in the near future. He states that Peters emphasis is entirely on prophecy as the sign of the inauguration of the last days.7 Snodgrass also views this passage as an instance of pesher exegesis and seems to follow Longenecker even in his terminology, when he says that Peter sees the event as an actualization of the text.8 Munck, in what may well be a tone of sarcastic overstatement, says that like everything else in the history of Jesus and of the primitive church, the miracle of languages that had just occurred was a fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy , indicating that he also probably sees Peter (or the
5 R. L. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) 95, emphasis mine. 6 Ibid., 100. 7 R. L. Longenecker, The Acts of the Apostles, The Expositors Bible Commentary (ed. F. Gaebelein; 12 vols.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981) 9:27576. He states parenthetically that Certainly [Peter] could not have foreseen a delay of many centuries before [the physical elements] fulfillment. 8 K. Snodgrass, The Use of the Old Testament in the New, The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (ed. G. K. Beale; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994) 42. He also explains exactly what is meant by pesher exegesis that the exegete begins with a historical event or person and then searches the OT text to find a mystery which is now being revealed.

author of Acts) as exhibiting pesher exegesis in searching for a text to support this notion of prophetic fulfillment.9 Bewer attempts to explain this concept of prophetic fulfillment in light of the general terminology used by Joel and the fact that he gives no statement of the content of these ecstatic and prophetic experiences.10 He does, however, go on to make the significant point that the author of Acts disregarded the other elements of the prediction, being solely intent on the outpouring of the Spirit.11 Wolff also notes that the importance is placed on the last statement, while using the whole passage as scriptural proof for ecstatic speech in the spirit, because it mentions the outpouring of the Spirit.12 Stuart says essentially the same thing, adding that this emphasis on the initial and final clauses cited is faithful to the context. He especially points out that this is in light of the fact that Peter was speaking in Jerusalem, which he calls the dominant subject of the remainder of the [last] verse.13 Allen understands Peters words to indicate fulfillment of the prophecy in the experience of the 120 at Pentecost. He calls it a realization in principle of the charismatic gifts enumerated in this ancient oracle. He suggests a connection between the physical signs and the events surrounding the crucifixion of Christ. He goes on to call this inaugurated eschatology in Peters mind.14 Haenchen also takes Peters words as indicating fulfillment, but because there is no mention of speaking in foreign languages, he applies it to the notion of ecstatic speech as covered by the reference to prophecy. He prefers to follow the text of B ( ) as the original reading in Acts 2:17, explaining that Luke would not have thought the last days to begin as soon as the Spirit has been outpoured.15 Patterson sees the application of Joels prophecy to the events of Pentecost as an indication that the Last Days were beginning and would culminate with the return of Christ, thus making Pentecost a corroborative pledge in the series of fulfillments that will culminate in the ultimate ful9 J. Munck, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967) 19. 10 J. A. Bewer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Obadiah and Joel (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1911) 126. 11 Ibid., 127. 12 H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos (Hermeneia; trans. W. Janzen, S. D. McBride, and C. A. Muenchow; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 70. 13 D. Stuart, Hosea-Jonah (WBC; Waco, TX: Word, 1987) 261. 14 L. C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976) 103104. 15 E. Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971) 17879.

fillment of Joels prophecy in the eschatological complex.16 Bruce sees Peters remarks as indicating that the last days have arrived, beginning with Christs first appearance and being consummated at His return. He considers the important parts of the prophecy for Luke to be the presence of the Spirit as the sign of the age to come, the call to repentance, and the prediction of the outpouring of Gods Spirit on the whole human race. He describes the effect of this outpouring as the gift of prophecy, exercised in visions and dreams and by word of mouth. He also takes the physical signs as referring back to the signs accompanying Christs death.17 Toussaint emphatically states that the introductory formula must mean Pentecost fulfilled what Joel had described. He sees the fulfillment as contingent, however, since obviously the prophecy was not completely fulfilled at that time.18 Hodges expands on a similar line of thinking, affirming the pesher usage of this is that as a popular fulfillment formula (which is not to say that Peters usage indicates pesher exegesis, but simply to point out that it would have had a familiar meaning to him and his audience). He does agree, however, that the fulfillment actually present in the events of Pentecost is restricted to the outpouring of the Spirit, with the signs and wonders never having been fulfilled at any point in church history. Thus, he concludes that these signs could have been fulfilled at that time but were necessarily contingent (upon a contingency which was never met). In support of this contingency, he points out that Jesus had left open the question of when the kingdom would be restored in chap. 1, and that Peters message in chap. 3 seems to offer an immediate return of Christ if Israel would repent.19 Feinberg, on the other hand, prefers to see Joels prophecy as prefilled, with Peter perceiving the events of Pentecost as proof that God would yet completely bring to pass all that Joel prophesied. He notes that the usual formula of fulfillment is not used here, and that many of the details of Joels prophecy are not actually fulfilled at that time.20 Finally, Kaiser takes something of a both-and position. He tips his hand early in the discussion when he says, regarding the need for Israel
16 R. D. Patterson, Joel, The Expositors Bible Commentary (ed. F. Gaebelein; 12 vols.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985) 7:25758. 17 F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts (NICNT; revised ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988) 6162. 18 S. D. Toussaint, Acts, The Bible Knowledge Commentary (ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck; 2 vols.; Victor, 1983) 2:358. 19 Z. C. Hodges, A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2, Issues in Dispensationalism (ed. W. R. Willis and J. R. Master; Chicago: Moody, 1994) 16870. 20 C. L. Feinberg, The Minor Prophets (Chicago: Moody, 1948) 82.

to be restored before the fulfillment, that to insist on these criteria would logically demand that the new covenants current benefits to the church likewise be rescinded until Israel is restored to her land. Of course, this is only a problem under at least two assumptions: 1) that the church currently benefits properly from the new covenant, and 2) that this benefit comes from an actual participation in the new covenant already fulfilled to some extent. He further seems to view the statements in Joel regarding the coming or at hand Day of Yahweh as indicating that it had already come in the form of the locust plague. But there is no clear indication in the text that Joel is doing anything more than tying the recent plague to the threat of the coming Day. It comes as no surprise then, that he concludes his discussion with an approach that allows for a preliminary fulfillment at Pentecost, looking forward to a future, ultimate fulfillment. He considers Peters inclusion of the signs to be essentially a homiletical device in keeping with the tone and purpose of Joels prophecy.21

9 Conclusions
Probably one of the more significant presuppositions that enters into this question is whether Peter actually said what Luke records. If the words are Lukes and Lukes alone, the alterations in the OT text and the surrounding remarks should be viewed from the perspective of someone looking back on the early spread of the church, with which the book of Acts is primarily concerned. On the other hand, if they are Peters actual words, given on the day of Pentecost following Christs ascension, they stand at the beginning of church history, in a time when the primary players were probably not very clear themselves as to what lay ahead for Israel and for this new entity that was being born. Space and time do not permit an involved discussion of these issues for the purposes of this paper, but the following remarks depend upon the assumption that Peter did actually speak these words, more or less verbatim. As Hodges points out, this passage must be considered in light of Peters other early appeals for the national repentance of Israel. Jesus had in fact chosen not to answer His disciples questions about the timing of the kingdom, and as far as they knew, there was no clear reason to expect that it would be after their lifetime. But what does seem to have been consis21 W. C. Kaiser, The Uses of the Old Testament in the New (Chicago: Moody, 1985). See also S. N. Ekwue, The Outpouring of the Spirit: An Exegetical and Theological Commentary on Joel 3:15 (Th.M. thesis, Capital Bible Seminary, 1990) 5474.

10

tent in their thinking is that national repentance would necessarily precede Christs return. And if that national repentance seemed possible in their day, they can hardly be blamed for appealing to the people as they did. It also seems that the terminology used to introduce the quote, whether it was a familiar pesher formula or not, would quite adequately identify the Pentecost event with Joels prophecy. And in light of the article used with , it does seem to have shown more of an identity than mere qualification. Because Peter substitutes , it is difficult to know whether he was thinking specifically of the need for other events in Joels context to precede this outpouring, but his familiarity with that context has already been noted and tends to support the notion that he did understand what the progression would have to be. So it does not seem inconceivable that, even as Peter identified this event with Joels prophecy, he realized that this was not yet an outpouring on all flesh, nor had all the circumstances come to pass that would make an all flesh outpouring possible. But it is probably enough to say that Peter expected this very outpouring to be the same outpouring that might extend to the whole nation of Israel, if they would repent as a nation. Clearly, repentance was a key criterion in Joels prophecy, to divert the impending judgment and experience the blessings described. And at this time, it would have been evident to Peter that Israel was once again at a similar crossroads. Who could say what judgment might come if they failed to repent, particularly in light of their recent execution of Yahwehs chosen Messiah, but their gracious God was still ready to receive them back with open arms, if they would turn to Him. Thus, it might be possible to see this as an already-not yet fulfillment in some sense, but not in the same way that someone like Kaiser or Allen might mean it. Rather, the already was the beginning of the outpouring of Gods Spirit on Israel, and the not yet was the full outpouring that would follow a national repentance. Since Israel did not repent as a nation and eventually did experience judgment at the hands of the Romans, the ultimate fulfillment has not yet come. It seems then that the contingency that was present in Joels prophecy has made it possible for Israel to reach more than one point in her history where national repentance could have brought the prophesied blessings. Just as he gave them the opportunity to avoid the great and fearsome day of Yahweh, Peter could address Israel in his day as at a similar crossroads, to move forward into judgment or turn back to God in repentance and experience blessing. But as the book of Acts and the rest of the NT go on to show us, only a remnant chose to follow Christ at that time, and judgment did come. 11

References
[1] Allen, L. C. The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976. [2] Bauer, W.; Arndt, W. F.; Gingrich, F. W.; Danker, F. W. A GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979. [3] Bewer, J. A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Obadiah and Joel. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1911. [4] Brenton, L. C. L. The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. Hendrickson, 1986. [5] Brown, F.; Driver, S. R.; Briggs, C. A. The New BrownDriver BriggsGesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon With an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1979. [6] Bruce, F. F. The Book of the Acts. NICNT. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988. [7] Ekwue, S. N. The Outpouring of the Spirit: An Exegetical and Theological Commentary on Joel 3:15. Th.M. thesis, Capital Bible Seminary, 1990. [8] Elliger, K., and W. Rudolph, ed. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990. [9] Feinberg, C. L. The Minor Prophets. Chicago: Moody, 1948. [10] Haenchen, E. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commmentary. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971. [11] Hatch, E., and Redpath, H. A. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books). 2 vols. Graz-Austria: Akademische Druck - U. Verlangsanstalt, 1954. [12] Hodges, Z. C. A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2. Issues in Dispensationalism. Ed. W. R. Willis and J. R. Master. Chicago: Moody, 1994. [13] Kaiser, W. C. The Uses of the Old Testament in the New. Chicago: Moody, 1985. 12

[14] Longenecker, R. L. Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. [15] Longenecker, R. L. The Acts of the Apostles. The Expositors Bible Commentary. Ed. F. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981. 9:205573. [16] Munck, J. The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. AB. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967. [17] Nestle, Eberhard, Erwin Nestle, B. Aland, K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, and B. M. Metzger, ed. Novum Testamentum Graece. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. [18] Patterson, R. D. Joel. The Expositors Bible Commentary. Ed. F. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985. 7:22766. [19] Rahlfs, A, ed. Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Wrttembergische Bibelanstalt Stuttgart, 1935. [20] Snodgrass, K. The Use of the Old Testament in the New. The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. Ed. G. K. Beale. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994. [21] Stuart, D. Hosea-Jonah. WBC. Waco, TX: Word, 1987. [22] Toussaint, S. D. Acts. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. 2 vols. Victor Books, 1983. 2:349432. [23] Wigram, G. V. The New Englishmans Hebrew Concordance. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1984. [24] Wolff, H. W. Joel and Amos. Hermeneia. Trans. W. Janzen, S. D. McBride, and C. A. Muenchow. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.

13