United in Difference: How the Church Embraces a Diverse World

Let us talk about identity, ethnicity, and difference. This statement is not discussed in many churches across the United States. In a highly polarized society where people can filter news, friends, and resources based on their preferences, engaging with differences or the “other” is not appealing or desired. Preserving and protecting personal comforts becomes the priority. The church collectively is no different. For example, are churches only concerned about what happens within their walls and not outside them? How many congregations gladly welcome people who are experiencing homelessness or other life circumstances? Based on demographic data of the area in which a church is planted, who is missing from the congregation? Would he or she feel that they belonged if they walked through the church’s doors?

These are questions that are relevant to churches today. Rather than solely seeking answers in secular spaces, the early church provides valuable insights into spreading the gospel and the role followers of Christ are to play in the community. The Acts of the Apostles provides clarity on the duty of the church, both past and present, in becoming a diverse and yet unified body of Christ. Specifically, the early church navigated cultural differences while spreading the Gospel during persecution and living in a Christ-centered community. The church should be setting an example of what it looks like to live in a multicultural community unified by Christ. The modern-day churches have the same mission to spread the Gospel across the ends of the earth. I argue that this is not just an external focus but requires churches to be multicultural and unified by the Holy Spirit.  

            The Acts of the Apostles provide a rich context for understanding the formation of the early church. For this paper, four key texts will be highlighted from the Acts of the Apostles: Acts 1:8, Acts 3:25, Acts 10:44-48, and Acts 17:26-27.

Social Identity Theory

            To understand how radical this was in the context of the early church, especially as a modern reader, it is important to understand the Jewish identity and tensions between the Jewish and Gentile communities. This paper will use the Social Identity Theory (SIT) model to provide insight into the cultural dynamics that are relevant to the original audience of the text. Kuecker defines social identity as “part of an individual’s personal identity derived from their knowledge of their membership in a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership.”[1] A person may have multiple social identities that become more prominent depending on the social context and group dynamics. A contextual example Kuecker provides is that a person can identify as both a Nazarene and an Israelite. With SIT, it is apparent that “diverse group affiliations lead to a world of divergent social identities that are not easy to reconcile.”[2] 

      Kuecker states that “who we are deeply influences how we are. Our sense of identity – which we understand ourselves to be – is intimately connected to how we live and interact in all of our relationships… one of Luke’s clear aims is to tell its hearers who they are, who they are, and how they are to be within their contexts.”[3] The focus of SIT is to see how membership in a group can impact or influence human identity. Rather than focusing on individual or personal identity, Kuecker focuses on social identity, which is more reflective of the cultures during the early church.

      Ethnicity can be a form of social identity. Kuecker argues against the popular assumption that ethnicity is determined by distinct cultural attributes. Using the example of the Jewish community, the cultural practices and traditions have changed based on the testaments to the modern day. Ethnicity is “the ethnic boundary that defines the group. An ethnic group is not formed because of a common language or culture; rather, an ethnic group is defined by a sense of ‘groupness’ (‘self-ascription and ascription by others) that can exist only about other groups.”[4] Moraff adds, “identity is never a flat category; it is always negotiated and malleable.”[5]   

      Using the example of Israel in the Old Testament, they were a distinct ethnic group due to their relationship with Yahweh. This required Israel, as God’s chosen people, to live differently compared to other nations who worshiped other gods. It is interesting to think of ethnicity as a boundary that is defined by both sameness and difference. Israel’s in-group ethnic identity was strengthened due to the fact they were God’s elected people.[6] A result of in-group bias and solidarity can be apathy towards the ‘other,’ specifically Gentiles. Israel, especially during the times in the Acts of the Apostles, was a marginalized community. This greatly influenced relationships with gentiles.

     A limitation of Moraff and Kuecker is that they do not address identities that are negatively assigned to a group of people, which leads to prejudice and discrimination. Sechrest talks about the intersection of cultures and W.E.B. Du Bois’ concept of double consciousness. Double consciousness refers to “how African Americans see themselves…both through their own eyes and through the eyes of a dehumanizing dominant culture.”[7] In applying this concept to the overarching Jewish identity and subgroups, the apostles, as Jewish Christians, are taking on a new identity that will result in persecution by both the dominant culture and leaders within their own Jewish community.

To the Ends of the Earth: What Does this Mean? (Acts 1:8)

            But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. And you will be my witnesses, telling people about me everywhere – in Jerusalem, throughout Judea, in Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. Acts 1:8, New Living Translation[8]

            In the context of this passage, Jesus has been resurrected and is about to ascend into heaven. Before Jesus ascends, He continues to inform the apostles about the Kingdom of God and the future gift of the Holy Spirit. Prior to this specific verse, Jesus is addressing the apostles about their question regarding the restoration of the Kingdom of Israel, specifically from Roman oppression. Bock points out that the apostles, who are part of the Jewish community, are eagerly waiting for the Messiah to liberate Israel from Rome. The apostles’ concerns were focused on nationalistic concerns and the fulfillment of promises for the benefit of the kingdom of Israel.[9] 

Jesus provides an answer unlike what the apostles expect. He tells them their mission is to be a witness for Christ, not just to Jerusalem, but to Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth. Bock states that a witness was someone who experienced Jesus and could testify about Christ’s ministry.[10] Fernando argues that followers of Christ in modern times cannot be a witness in the same way as the original apostles. Believers today did not directly “witness Jesus’ ministry and resurrection.”[11] Fernando suggests that it is only by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit that a believer, after the early church, can become a witness for Christ.[12] Keener proposes that it is important to see the apostles’ mission not as a simple command but as a divine promise that will be victorious.[13]

Now that witness has been explained; it is necessary to unpack the ‘ends of the earth’. Regardless of what interpretation one takes, it is at least evident that the early church went beyond its ethnic bubble. Keener explains this in the context of the original audience. He discusses how since the Acts ended in Rome, the ‘ends of the earth’ could mean Rome. Keener also provides the arguments for Gades, India, Thule, China, Nubia, and many other places based on trade ties at that time.[14] However, Keener suggests that this is an ongoing mission that extends beyond the close of Acts. Kuecker believes that “Luke’s primary concern both in Acts 1:8 and in the text as a whole is with people as much, and likely more, than places.”[15] Bock furthers this argument by stating that ‘ends of the earth,’ referencing Isaiah 49:6. “You will do more than restore the people of Israel to me. I will make you a light to the Gentiles, and you will bring my salvation to the ends of the earth.”

Bock recommends that the ‘ends of the earth’ are both geographic and ethnic, inclusive of all people.[16] regardless of what interpretation one takes, it is at least evident that the early church went beyond its ethnic bubble. The goal, based on the Old Testament, is to share the Gospel with the whole world; this is how God’s kingdom would spread.  Jesus is addressing the concern that apostles would solely focus on the Jewish community diaspora instead of reaching all people or Gentiles.[17] As Isaiah 49:6 states, the apostles play a pivotal role in restoring Israel and Gentiles to Yahweh.

      It is important to discuss the meaning of the word Gentile in the context of the early church. The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible defines the word Gentiles “as when Hebrew and Greek words are translated  (from the Latin word for nations), they refer to all ethnic groups outside of the Jewish community.”[18] It is interesting to see how nation (ethene) and gentiles (ethnos) and the Latin word gentilis, which means “belonging to a gens [clan, nation]”[19] In the New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, there is a clear distinction in how the word nation is used in the Old Testament compared to the New Testament. In the Old Testament, Israel was to be distinct and separate from other nations who worship idol gods.

In the New Testament, there is a shift as the priority becomes less about preserving Israel’s identity and more about creating a new identity of believers that would cross ethnic and cultural lines. Based on research conducted for this paper, this understanding of the nation seems to be the most plausible. As Bock mentioned, the focus of God’s mission is people, all people. To make this transition and live out this mission, a cultural shift in relationships would have to take place between the Jewish and Gentile communities. In this next section, this paper will discuss in more detail the relationship between the Gentile and Jewish communities and how this relates to theologies around race and ethnicity.

All Families on Earth will be Blessed: Relationship of Jews and the Gentiles (Acts 3:25)

            “You are the children of these prophets, and you are included in the covenant God promised to your ancestors. For God said to Abraham, ‘Through your descendants, all the families on earth will be blessed. Acts 3:25, New Living Translation

        These are words that many members of the Jewish community had heard. However, the social boundary lines now looked different. Jesus assigned the apostles the mission to be his witnesses to the ends of the earth, i.e., all nations. In Acts 3:25, “God’s promises were made to and for Israel first of all… Israel [is the] natural recipient of [this] message of hope [that, through Israel], will reach all the families of the earth… [and become a] new community rooted in God’s old promises.”[20] Keener states, “This passage recognizes that God will ultimately bless Gentiles too (3:25-26), but offers a restoration of Israel if [they] will now turn and receive him.”[21] Jesus was not only asking for the apostles to spread the Gospel, but Gentiles were also to be included in this new body of believers.

Navigating the complexity of identity and ethnic identities and engaging with the ‘other,’ there is plenty of opportunity for intergroup conflict and tensions. Kuecker highlights an example of this tension. In Luke 9:51-56, James and John, part of the Jewish community, ask Jesus if they can call down fire from heaven to burn up a Samaritan village after the people did not welcome Jesus. Jesus rebukes them for making such a request. It is important to truly understand the long-standing prejudice and hatred between the Samarians and the Jewish community. The tension between Samaria and Israel originates back during the kingdom split of Israel. The separation resulted in the northern Kingdom of Israel, with the capital city Samaria, and the southern Kingdom of Judah, with Jerusalem being the capital city. Both kingdoms grew apart due to idol worship and reliance on neighboring nations instead of Yahweh. Israel (northern kingdom) was the first to fall by the hands of Assyria, and the ten tribes of Israel residing were taken into slavery and scattered. Shortly after, Judah (southern kingdom) was destroyed by the Babylonians. Scripture follows the lineage of the Kingdom of Judah, as it aligns with the Davidic prophecy of the Messiah.

After being exiled, oppressed, and awaiting the promise of the Messiah, it is easier to understand why maintaining the Jewish identity was extremely important. The effect of outside cultural influences and consistent shift of empire leadership (Persian, Greek, and brief independence before being under Roman rule) resulted in the development of different sects of Judaism. Moraff discusses the diversity of subgroup identities and perspectives of Jesus within the Jewish community. In reference to the Jewish community, specifically people who do not turn to Jesus, Jewish people “retain their covenantal status and hope for repentance remains for them.”[22] Jesus is part of the Jewish community and is “intertwined with and inseparable from Israel.”[23]

Jesus was asking for the apostles to focus not only on the restoration of Israel but to establish a new identity in Christ that went across social, cultural, and ethnic boundaries. The identity of being God’s elect people now incorporated Gentiles and all the subgroups within the Jewish ethnic identity. [24] Kuecker states,

“no social group can exist without boundaries. Thus, to suggest that the Jesus movement does not imply a clearly defined ‘other’ is misleading. The Jesus movement…exhibits a ‘universal particularity’ with its universal aspect defined by the cosmic lordship of the exalted Jesus. Jesus’ lordship over all peoples is the prerequisite which allows all humans, regardless of class, ethnicity or gender, the opportunity to recognize, affirm and submit to Jesus’ identity.”[25] 

However, what does this look like in actual practice? How are these different communities to become one? The next section will focus on the role of the Holy Spirit in the Christian mission of the church.

Holy Spirit Poured Out: The Role of the Holy Spirit in Christian Mission (Acts 10:44-48)

            Even as Peter was saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who were listening to the message. The Jewish believers who came with Peter were amazed that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles, too. Acts 10:44 – 48, New Living Translation

As defined in Acts 1:8, the mission of the church is clear. They are called to be witnesses for Christ and spread the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Bock provides clarity that the Holy Spirit “empowered [the apostles] to speak boldly by testifying to the message of God’s works through Jesus.”[26] Fernando states that this “passage shows us how important the Holy Spirit is to our understanding of mission and how important mission is to our understanding of the Holy Spirit.”[27] In Acts 10:44-48, often referred to as the Pentecost of the Gentile World, it is the first time that the Holy Spirit falls on Gentiles.[28] This was a significant moment for the Jewish Christians who saw Gentiles receive the gift of the Holy Spirit without laying hands, being circumcised, or baptized.[29] This passage mirrors the first Pentecost (Acts 2:12) and affirms that Gentiles can be saved and the expansiveness of God’s plan.[30] Keener mentions that the word ‘pouring’ (Acts 10:45) is in response to Joel 2:28-29. Keener suggests this “indicates that Joel’s ‘all flesh’ includes Gentile believers as well as Jewish ones.”[31]

Bock suggests this passage reveals how God works in harmony in the Trinity: “God takes the initiative, Jesus acts as the center of the plan, and the Holy Spirit confirms all of this is God’s work.”[32] The Holy Spirit, not ethnic identity, becomes the determining factor that selects membership into the church. The Holy Spirit is a gift to God’s covenantal people. Keener states, “God would hardly pour his Spirit into vessels he had not already purified or cleansed.”[33] However, the process of incorporating Gentiles required addressing concerns and questions within the Jewish Christian community. Leaders of the Jewish Christian community held a to discuss how the Jewish – Gentile Christian community would interact. Sechrest adds that members of the Gentile community were not in attendance at the conference to resolve issues concerning the nature of their participation in the community.[34] This is interesting because, in this context, Jewish Christians, a historically marginalized minority, contain much of the power and influence.

The sudden fellowship between Jewish and Gentile communities, after years of tension and segregation, is solely due to the power of the Holy Spirit. The early church relied heavily on the discernment of the Holy Spirit to show apostles which cities to travel to and which ones to avoid. As the church continued to spread, the body of believers would continually become more diverse. How would the early church navigate these differences, and how is this applicable to the church today?

Reaching the Nations: United Not Uniform (Acts 17:26-27)

            From one man, he created all the nations throughout the whole earth. He decided beforehand when they should rise and fall, and he determined their boundaries. His purpose was for the nations to seek after God and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him – though he is not far from any one of us. Acts 17:26-27, New Living Translation

         According to Fernando, verse 26 specifically focuses on God’s sovereignty over all humanity, both Jewish and Gentile.[35] “Reference to Adam shows that all people [have] their roots in the Creator God…the role of humanity is to seek God.”[36] In this passage, the apostle Paul addresses the urban Greek elite, including the Stoics and Epicureans.[37] Paul is speaking against idols and false Greek gods.[38] The basis of Keener’s argument is that God has “already revealed himself to humanity, undercutting the need for idols.”[39] God does not need to rely on the idol worship of humans.  

Paul’s point that all humanity shares a common ancestry with Adam “puts all people on the same level.”[40] With this in mind, Kuecker states, “sub-group identities need not dissolve for deep peace to be experienced by [the] church….The ability of the church to exist as a community composed of former ‘enemies’ and ‘others’ would no doubt provide a compelling vision of the kingdom reign of the exalted Jesus.”[41] As mentioned in the previous section, navigating the complexity of identity, power, and relating to the ‘other’ can be extremely challenging. Without the discerning power of the Holy Spirit, sinful systems, such as racism, exist. Sanou provides this definition of racism. “Racism is the generalizing definition and valuation of differences, whether real or imaginary, to the advantage of the one defining or deploying them, and to the detriment of the one subjugated to the act of definition, whose purpose is to justify (social or physical) hostility and assault.”[42] This definition addresses that there is an intentional dehumanization that attempts to deny the image bearer of the ‘other’ solely based on the social construction of race.

As discussed, “ethnic and racial differences are not the problem. Prejudice and racism inject our differences with the sinful notion that our difference leads to superiority and inferiority or the distorted belief that our differences are merely cultural cues for determining who is in and who is out rather than emblems of God’s gift of diversity.”[43] Hays presents a key question to the modern-day church. “We in the church today need to ask ourselves the question as to why our earthly churches differ so much in composition from the congregations depicted in Revelations 7:9.”[44]

Part of the issue is addressed in Wiley’s work. Wiley mentions how Acts 17:26 has been used to both support abolitionist (fought to free African Americans from chattel slavery in the United States) and segregationist (believed in the separation of races) perspectives. It is important to mention that there were both abolitionists and segregationists within the church or body of believers. Abolitionists argued that all humans can be traced to one man, otherwise known as one one-blood doctrine.[45] One blood doctrine, termed by Bishop Ransom in his speech The Race Problem in a Christian State, “was an important means of underscoring the central theme of the unity of humanity as well as the equality of all people before God.”[46] 

Using the same scripture, segregationists used the example of the privilege given to Israel to “support the segregation of races as part of God’s eternal plan.”[47] According to Wiley, the segregationist's main argument is on the authority of scripture and social order (about the end of verse 26). Wiley points out that segregationists assume that the use of ethnos implies race. However, that is not supported by how it is used in both the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles.[48] Rather than prioritizing understanding this scripture in the original context and the intended original audience, meaning is being construed by the reader to attempt to justify the dehumanization of the ‘other.’

In response, Williams refers to Peter’s revelation that “God shows no partiality, but in every nation, anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him… the giving of the Holy Spirit is the eraser of ethnic difference (Acts 10: 23b-48).”[49] Humanity is to be united under the sovereignty of God. However, ethnic differences should not be erased or ignored. Instead, “Luke proclaims the Spirit-created possibility of a beautifully diverse community of peace that exists as an outpost of the eschatological new creation amid a world marked by interethnic strife.”[50] The church was intended to be a light in the darkness, the salt of the earth. Rather than reflecting the brokenness and sin, the witnesses are called to reflect Christ.

Christ is the common identity that transcends, not ignores, all others. We, the church, are called to be united, not uniform. “A united people… had the greatest strength and were invincible – even against larger nations… unity is, in fact, a sign of divine favor.”[51] Today, the modern church can be encouraged and built upon the lessons from the early apostles. For true restoration, reconciliation, and the spread of the Gospel to take place, people from all nations, backgrounds, life experiences, genders, etc., must be seen and recognized as image bearers of God who contain a story that ties into God’s redemptive plan.

Application: What Does This Mean for the Church Today?

            The mission of the church is to be a witness for Christ throughout the end of the earth. While the early church, empowered by the Holy Spirit, demonstrated what this looks like, there is a more recent history of racism, discrimination, and hurt that is, at times, orchestrated by the church. During imperial colonization, in which the church played an influential role, there was rape, genocide, and enslavement of people who were considered uncivilized and unclean. As referenced by Wiley, certain communities within the United States church attempted to use scripture to justify segregation in schools and churches alike. Legislation to end segregation was only signed in 1964, and the impacts are still prevalent today.

            Many churches within the United States still reflect the strife and division of systemic discrimination. People’s value is determined by where they are from and the languages they speak. The hateful and hurtful speech comes from the mouths of people who claim to be a follower of Jesus. For the church to be aligned and restored to its original mission, it must reflect Christ and not the sin in the world today. This does not mean that believers are called to be perfect, but rather that the church should be aligned, directed, and informed by the Holy Spirit and the full biblical story of God.

            Working for a church community in the heart of this nation’s capital, there is so much diversity. Within this one church alone, there are over 80+ different nationalities! This does not include the full breadth of the diversity represented in this one congregation. As the Director of Church Engagement, my role seeks to support the church’s mission of making disciples who love, think, and act like Jesus by creating intentional onramps and spaces for people to belong in the community. This requires invitation in three specific areas: the Holy Spirit, discipleship, and incorporating the ‘other.’

Invitation: Holy Spirit

            Often, conversations and restorative work around race and ethnicity take place in the secular world, not church spaces. As churches lean into this area, the church must rely on the power and discernment of the Holy Spirit and not the world. Like the apostles, the Holy Spirit has the power to break down societal barriers and to heal hearts and minds. Rather than attempting to re-create worldly practices, the church must evaluate what approach is most aligned with scripture and the Spirit of God.

An example is the defining key terms that are used in the context of the church. This is important because many people are drawn to our specific church because of the diversity. However, the focus should always be on Christ. For instance, the definition of inclusion is creating spaces that remove barriers, both intentional and unintentional, that prevent people from experiencing Christ. This definition was developed with key scriptures such as Revelation 7:9 and partnered with the work of the Holy Spirit to build the Kingdom of God across various cultures, ethnic identities, life experiences, abilities, etc. It is essential to remember that this restorative work within the church must look different because Christ calls us to live differently.

Invitation: Discipleship

            The goal of the church is not just to have people attend church but to have people be transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit and become witnesses for Christ. Within the context of my role, I focus on the discipling process for people across all types of diversity, especially when an aspect of a person’s identity has been marginalized or dehumanized. An essential part of this type of discipleship is to provide restorative spaces that lead to reconciliation and healing.

Invitation: Incorporating the Other

Learning from the apostles and the early church, it is important to incorporate others into the body of Christ. Part of this process is for individuals to reflect on their own stories (life experiences, identities, etc.) first. This allows space for a person then to make space for other’s stories, especially when it is drastically different from their own. The final step is to see how all these stories fit into God’s redemptive plan and unifying narrative that is actively being lived out. By doing this, we can experience glimpses of God’s kingdom now.

Conclusion

The priority and mission of the church is to be a witness of Christ to the world. Fernando states that the churches today fall into the dichotomy of either being scripture-focused or prioritizing the Holy Spirit. However, “the history of the church is studded with beautiful examples of Christian leaders and movements that integrated a warm heart and sound mind.”[52] By the power of the Holy Spirit, the early church in Acts provides insight into how to be united in Christ across social, ethnic, and racial boundaries while honoring diversity. “If we Christians today are to have any hope of obeying the biblical command to form a unified people of God out of diverse ethnicities, we too must acknowledge and follow the critical leading and empowering of the Spirit.”[53] It is possible, even in a world that feels so divided. Instead of reinforcing boundary lines formed from sin and brokenness, the church, empowered by the Holy Spirit and scripture, can actively witness to the ends of the world and work towards the diverse and unified Kingdom of God.

Bibliography

Bock, Darrell L.  Acts: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.

Fernando, Ajith.  Acts: The NIV Application Commentary from Biblical Text. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.

Hays, J. Daniel.  From Every People and Nation: A Biblical Theology of Race. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003.

Keener, Craig S.  “Commentary.” In Acts: New Cambridge Bible Commentary, 96-636. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020

Kuecker, Aaron.  The Spirit and the ‘Other’: Social Identity, Ethnicity, and Intergroup Reconciliation in Luke-Acts. London: T&T Clark International, 2011.

McKenzie, Steven L.  “Nothing Common or Unclean: Growing Pains of the Early Church in the Book of Acts” In All God’s Children: A Biblical Critique of Racism, XX. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997.

Moraff, Jason F.  “Recent Trends in the Study of Jews and Judaism in Luke-Acts.” Currents in Biblical Research, vol. 19, no. 1, 2020, pp. 64-87.

Sakenfeld, Katherine D.  The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006.

Sechrest, Love L.  “Negotiating Culture in the Family of God in the Book of Acts” In Race and Rhyme: Rereading the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2022.

Sanou, Boubakar.  “Ethnicity, Tribalism and Racism: A Global Challenge for the Christian Church and Its Mission.” The Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, vol. 9, no.1, Spring 2015, pp. 94-104. 

Thompson, Alan J.  One Lord, One People: The Unity of the Church in Acts in its Literary Setting.  Grand Rapids: London, 2008.

Wiley, Daniel P.  “Moving Beyond the Bounds: A Response to the Segregationist Interpretation of Acts 17:26.” Evangelical Review of Theology, vol. 46, no.3, August 2022, pp. 226-38.

Williams, Demetrius K.  “Acts” In True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary, edited by Brian K Blout, Cain Hope Felder, et al., 213 - 248.  Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.

[1] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other,’ 27.

[2] Ibid, 35.

[3] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other,’ 24.

[4] Ibid, 36.

[5] Jason F. Moraff, “Recent Trends in the Study of Jews and Judaism in Luke-Acts,” Currents in Biblical Research 19 (2020): 71.

[6] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other,’ 40.

[7] Love L. Sechrest, “Negotiating Culture in Family of God in the Book of Acts,” in Race and Rhyme: Rereading the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2022), 115.

[8] New Living Translation, all scripture will be referenced using this translation.

[9] Darrell L. Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 62.

[10] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 64.

[11] Ajith Fernando, Acts: The NIV Commentary from Biblical Text (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 57.

[12] Fernando, Acts: The NIV, 57.

[13] Craig S. Keener, “Commentary,” in Acts: New Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 106.

[14] Keener, “Commentary,” 108.

[15] Aaron Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other’: Social Identity, Ethnicity, and Intergroup Reconciliation in Luke-Acts (London: T&T Clark International, 2011), 99.

[16] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 65.

[17] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 66

[18] Katherine D. Sakenfeld, The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006).

[19] Sakenfeld, The New Interpreter’s.

[20] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 181.

[21] Keener, “Commentary,” 185.

[22] Moraff, “Recent Trends,” 78.

[23] Ibid., 78.

[24] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other’, 104

[25] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other’, 222.

[26] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 63.

[27] Fernando, Acts: The NIV, 57.

[28] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 400.

[29] Fernando, Acts: The NIV, 337.

[30] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 400.

[31] Keener, “Commentary,” 305.

[32] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 401.

[33] Keener, “Commentary,” 305.

[34] Sechrest, “Negotiating Culture,” 131.

[35] Fernando, Acts: The NIV, 475.

[36] Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical, 566

[37] Keener, “Commentary,” 439.

[38] Ibid., 443.

[39] Ibid, 443.

[40] Ibid, 445.

[41] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other’, 229.

[42] Boubakar Sanou, “Ethnicity, Tribalism, and Racism: A Global Challenge for the Christian Church and Its Mission,” 9 (2015): 95.

[43] Sanou, “Ethnicity, Tribalism and Racism,” 94.

[44] J. Daniel Hays, From Every People and Nation: A Biblical Theology of Race (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003), 200.

[45] Daniel P. Wiley, “Moving Beyond the Bounds: A Response to the Segregationist Interpretation of Acts 17:26,” Evangelical Review of Theology 46 (2022): 232.

[46] Demetrius K. Williams, “Acts,” in True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 236.

[47] Wiley, “Moving Beyond the Bounds,” 226.

[48] Ibid., 237.

[49] Williams, “Acts,” 230.

[50] Kuecker, The Spirit and the ‘Other,’ 230.

[51] Alan J. Thompson, One Lord, One People: The Unity of the Church in Acts in its Literary Setting (Grand Rapids: London, 2008), 134.

[52] Fernando Acts The NIV, 58.

[53] Hays, From Every People, 164.