Steven Carr

'In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen.'

Why did Jesus give instructions to the apostles through the Holy Spirit, rather than through his mouth?

ph2ter

Look also Acts 10.41 which is very similar in strangeness:
"They killed him by hanging him on a tree, but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”

Why he was seen by those who ate and drank with him after he rose, rather than before?

aa5874

Acts appears to be an anti-Marcionite document. The author of Acts is trying to establish that Jesus was of flesh or was completely human when he was resurrected.

Solo

You are right: this is strange because Luke 24:41-43 mentions that risen Jesus is consuming fish before the disciples in what appears to be demonstration of his physicality. He specifically asks if there was food, which indicates that the disciples were not eating themselves at the time. There is no indication that he ate (and drank) with them, as Act 10:41 stresses.

Jiri

ph2ter

I don't know how that would help, because eating and drinking was not a problem for the Docetists.
But wine was.
The Marcionites were abstaining from wine, which was excluded from their Eucharist. They were using water in place of wine.

I would digress a little.

"If Christ were without flesh and blood, of what sort of flesh and blood are the bread and wine, the images with which He commanded that the memorial of Him should be made?" (cf. Ign. ad. Smyrn. 7; Iren. iv. 18, v. 2; Tert. adv. Marcion. iv. 40)

Wine is somehow connected with the gifts of the Holy Spirit:
Acts 2:
All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues
Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine."
14Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15These men are not drunk, as you suppose."

This may mean that they drank Eucharistic wine and that speaking in tongues was a consequence of that.

Paul also says in 1 Corinthians:
23So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understanding or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

and Ephesians:
18Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

lintrap

Interesting. Does this school of thought coincide with the writers of John, since it is the only gospel that includes Jesus' first miracle? Or is it seperate?

aa5874

This passage show exactly the point. The God/man Jesus had flesh and blood, Marcion's Jesus had neither flesh nor blood.

The Eucharist is commanded by the God/man Jesus who proved he was of flesh when he ate and drank with the disciples after he resurrected.

spamandham

Perhaps the author of Acts is tipping his hand a bit and revealing that he knows the gospel (Luke in this case) is an allegorical story rather than literal history.

ApostateAbe

My model of the early Christians is something like modern Pentecostals, where they would use gifts of prophecy, healing, speaking in tongues and communication with God all through the Holy Spirit. Communication from the Holy Spirit is much more important, because they took the Holy Spirit very seriously, especially the followers of the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts.

Luke 12:10
"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him."

You can see in that quote that the authority of the Holy Spirit supersedes the authority of the "Son of Man," probably thought to be Jesus himself. Mark 3:28-29 is similar, but it says that all blasphemies will be forgiven except for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (no mention of Jesus or the Son of Man). They may have thought of the Holy Spirit as their link to God, and to blaspheme the Holy Spirit is to sever that link.

andrewcriddle

Some would render this ie Jesus had been guided by the Holy Spirit in his choice of the apostles.

Andrew Criddle