The word law has been made specific by rendering God’s law, so that the English reader would understand the correct meaning of the word in this type of context. God’s law is, of course, “the law that comes from God” or “the law that God gives.” It is rarely translated by a “possessive construction,” for it is not “the law that God possesses.” In some instances the source of the law can be combined with a rendering of received, for example, “the ones to whom God gave the law.”

Although the words translated that was handed down by angels comes from a very difficult Greek expression, most exegetes agree that this is the meaning. As used by Stephen the words are intended to underline the greatness of the significance of the law which the Israelites received, though Paul uses a similar expression in exactly the opposite fashion (see Galatians 3.19). It should be noticed that the Hebrew Old Testament does not mention that God used angels as mediators to give his law to his people, but the Septuagint of Deuteronomy 33.2 adds “angels with him (that is, with the Lord), at his right hand.”

The difference in the role between God who gives the law and the angels who act as mediators may be expressed in some languages as “God gave the law … the angels spoke it to Moses.” On the other hand, one may also say “the law came from God by means of the angels.” This latter translation leaves the specific relationship to the event more ambiguous.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse is transitional as is indicated by the particles that Luke uses to begin it. Although it is thought by some that the subject of the verb went back should include Philip, most commentators understand the subject to be only Peter and John.

The phrase had given their testimony may require a goal in certain languages, for example, “said what they knew concerning Jesus Christ” or “had shared with people what they knew about Jesus.” The term of “knowing” should imply personal experience. The Lord’s message may be understood as “the message which the Lord had spoken” or “the message about the Lord.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The full impact of the adverb “immediately” (“and immediately in the synagogues he was preaching”) is retained by the Good News Translation he went straight to … and began. An American Translation* accomplishes this by “(Saul) began at once”; while it is expressed “without delay” by Phillips, and “soon” in the New English Bible; but the meaning is missed by Jerusalem Bible (“he began preaching”).

This is the only place in Acts where the title Son of God is applied to Jesus (see, however, the quotation of Psalm 2.7 in 13.33).

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It is impossible to conclude exactly what meal was being prepared: the Romans ate a meal around noon, but the main meal of the Jewish people was eaten in the late afternoon. In any case, the fact that Peter became hungry was what prepared him for the vision. Whereas the Jews would say “a trance came upon someone,” the nearest English equivalent would be to say “he fell into a trance” (see New English Bible, Revised Standard Version, Phillips). The Good News Translation renders “a trance fell on him” by he had a vision. This is done inasmuch as in the context the emphasis is not so much on the state of Peter (as in a trance or in ecstasy) as it is upon what he saw (that is, a vision).

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It is possible to take in the name of Jesus Christ with the verb ordered. However, most commentators and translators take it with to be baptized.

The expression baptized in the name of Jesus Christ is often rendered as “baptized using the name of Jesus Christ.”

By staying with the Gentile believers for a few days Peter proved both that they were now accepted as full members of the Christian community and that it was possible for Jews and Gentiles to have fellowship with one another.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Believed is the main verb in the sentence and connected to it are two participles. Most translators apparently understand the first participle in a temporal sense, when he saw what had happened (but see Jerusalem Bible, which takes it as a descriptive participle, “who had watched everything”). It seems better to take the second participle in a purely descriptive sense, he was greatly amazed at the teaching about the Lord, rather than to take it in a causal sense as though this was the basis for the governor’s faith (see Jerusalem Bible “became a believer, being astonished by what he had learnt about the Lord”).

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The concept of boldly is variously expressed in different languages, “they spoke everything,” “they spoke without thinking about who they were speaking to,” or “they spoke without caring who heard.”

The passive expression should be spoken first to you may be rendered as an active, “that someone should first speak to you”; but it also may be shifted from speaking to hearing, “that you should be the first to hear the word from God.”

The concept of reject may be expressed as “insist it is not true” or “refuse to believe it.” In a sense both processes are involved since those who rejected the word denied its truth and also refused to believe that it was relevant to them.

It is difficult to translate adequately the word worthy. If this is understood in a sense of “good enough to receive eternal life,” then there is a very serious theological problem involved since the receiving of eternal life is by the grace of God and is in no way related to man’s own personal worthiness. The emphasis of the Greek term at this point would seem to be equivalent to “appropriateness” or “the right one,” for example, “do not consider yourselves the appropriate ones to receive eternal life.” On the other hand, one may shift the negative aspect of this expression and render the phrase as “condemn yourselves as being unworthy to have eternal life.” That is to say, the rejection of the Good News serves as the basis for the people condemning themselves. In some languages this is expressed as “you have condemned yourselves and are thus not good enough to receive eternal life.”

The phrase eternal life is used only here and in verse 48 in Acts. Literally the term means “life in the age,” that is, the age in which God would rule as opposed to the present evil age. Basically then the term has a qualitative rather than a quantitative significance, and so places the emphasis on the kind of life that one has when God rules in his life.

This phrase eternal life is probably one of the most difficult expressions of the Bible to render satisfactorily. Literally the meaning of “eternal” or “everlasting” refers to length of time, for example, “life that never ends.” But this can be very seriously misunderstood if people are to conclude that by becoming Christians they will never die. On the other hand, to use an expression such as “life which comes from God” or “true life” is to miss some of the significance of this quality of life which does continue not only throughout one’s earthly lifetime, but even after death. In some languages an attempt has been made to represent both the qualitative and the quantitative factors involved by translating “real life which never ends.” This may ultimately be the best solution.

Luke evidently intends this rejection of the Christians message by the Jews to be the factor which initiated the actual mission to the Gentiles. Up to this point Paul’s preaching has been directed to only one other Gentile, Sergius Paulus. The apostles now not only go to the Gentiles, but in so doing they leave the Jews; for this reason the Good News Translation has translated leave you and go to the Gentiles (Greek “we will go to the Gentiles”). This statement does not mean that Paul and Barnabas would refuse to preach the Good News to the Jews, for Paul’s policy continued to be that of preaching the Good News first in the Jewish synagogues wherever he went. However, in this city the Jews had refused the Christian message, and Paul and Barnabas would henceforth turn to the Gentiles.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .