French L. Arrington, The Acts Of The Apostles An Introduction And Commentary

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Charles Holman’s review critically assesses L. Arrington’s *The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary*, a publication noteworthy for being a full-length commentary on Acts from a Pentecostal perspective. Arrington states his intention to write a “readable and yet reliable commentary” beneficial to a broad spectrum of serious Bible students, including scholars, pastors, theological students, and laypersons. However, Holman suggests a more realistic primary audience consists of ministers, theological students, and dedicated laypersons seeking deeper understanding. The commentary’s format, mirroring the Anchor Bible series with sections for “Comments,” “Exposition,” and unit bibliographies, offers a structured approach to the text. For its identified target audience of ministers, students, and laypersons, the commentary offers significant value. Arrington elucidates key Greek terms and expressions, and effectively presents institutions and practices within the first-century Palestinian and Graeco-Roman contexts, facilitating a better understanding of significant events in apostolic history. Arrington’s unapologetic articulation and vigorous defense of his Pentecostal convictions are central to the commentary’s character. He consistently argues for Spirit-baptism as an experience subsequent to regeneration, engaging with scholars like J.D.G. Dunn and providing detailed discussions on glossolalia, portraying it not as “gibberish” but as a divine manifestation. Holman notes the refreshing enthusiasm for the Holy Spirit evident in the work, which also integrates devotional elements emphasizing a Spirit-filled life beyond an initial experience, and the cooperative role of believers in Spirit-inspired utterance. Despite these strengths, Holman identifies several limitations for a scholarly readership. The commentary lacks frequent engagement with primary sources beyond the Old and New Testaments, seldom addresses text-critical issues, and offers only minimal discussion on the historicity of Acts or the importance of the “we” passages for authorship. More significantly, Holman argues that Arrington’s theological presuppositions at times unduly influence his exegesis, particularly concerning Spirit-reception. For instance, Arrington interprets water baptism in Acts 2:38 as a consequence of sins already forgiven, a reading Holman contends contradicts mainstream contemporary baptismal theology and even the grammar interpretation of Dana and Mantey cited by Arrington. Similarly, the interpretation of Cornelius’s conversion occurring *before* Peter’s arrival in Acts 10 is deemed “forced exegesis,” especially in light of Acts 11:14, which suggests Peter’s message was essential for Cornelius’s household to be “saved.” The review also highlights a critical semantic confusion regarding the term “receive” the Spirit within Pentecostal/Charismatic discourse. While Arrington rightly acknowledges that all Christians possess the Spirit (cf. Romans 8:9), he consistently interprets “receiving the Spirit” in Acts (e.g., 2:38, 8:15, 10:47, 19:2) as a distinct, subsequent baptism with the Spirit, rather than the regenerating work. Holman questions whether it was normative in the New Testament church for the “power of the Spirit” to be received subsequent to regeneration, or if these experiences could be coincidental, calling for greater clarity in “reception theology.” Nevertheless, Arrington’s commentary is praised for its engaging and captivating style, combining historical and theological insights with a special focus on pneumatology. Produced with a pleasing format by Hendrickson Publishers, it remains a valuable resource for its intended audience, offering devotional insights and strong support for Pentecostal exegetical and theological perspectives, despite the scholarly and exegetical challenges raised by the reviewer, Charles L. Holman of Regent University.