A persecutor becomes a preacher. This chapter records one of the most dramatic conversions in history—Saul of Tarsus, the church's fiercest enemy, encounters the risen Christ on the road to Damascus. Blinded and humbled, Saul is transformed into Paul, who will become Christianity's greatest missionary. Meanwhile, Peter continues his ministry, healing Aeneas and raising Dorcas from the dead, demonstrating that God's power works through His apostles to confirm the gospel message.
Luke opens the chapter without a transitional particle—Ὁ δὲ Σαῦλος (“Now Saul”) picks up directly from 8:3 (“Saul was ravaging the church”), as if the eunuch’s baptism on the Gaza road had been a structural parenthesis. The framing is deliberate. Saul’s anti-disciple campaign was the engine that scattered Philip into Samaria; that scattering produced the Samaritan and Ethiopian conversions of chapter 8; now the engine itself is about to be commandeered. The participial chain ἔτι ἐμπνέων ἀπειλῆς καὶ φόνου (“still breathing threats and murder,” v. 1) gives the durative present: Saul has not paused; the persecution is still in his lungs. The genitives ἀπειλῆς καὶ φόνου function as objective genitives after ἐμπνέων—he is breathing threat-and-murder the way a fire breathes smoke. Luke chooses this vocabulary precisely so the reversal of v. 17 (“be filled with the Holy Spirit”) will register as one breath replacing another.
The administrative detail of vv. 1-2 carries weight. Saul approaches the high priest (Caiaphas, or by 33-34 CE possibly Theophilus son of Annas) and obtains ἐπιστολάς (“letters”) for the Damascus synagogues. The historicity is plausible: the Jerusalem high priesthood retained legal-administrative jurisdiction over diaspora Jewish communities by Roman concession (cf. 1 Macc 15:15-21; Josephus, Ant. 14.190-216), and a writ of extradition from the high priest would have carried weight in Damascus, then under Nabataean influence under Aretas IV. The phrase τῆς ὁδοῦ ὄντας (“those being of the Way,” v. 2) is the chapter’s first occurrence of the Lukan technical term ἡ ὁδός for the early Christian movement (cf. 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22). The irony is structural: Saul travels a road (πορεύεσθαι, v. 3) seeking those of the Way and meets the Way himself.
The theophany of vv. 3-7 is structured around three sensory contrasts that Luke develops with care. Light: Saul sees light from heaven (v. 3, φῶς ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ); his companions presumably see the light too (Saul tells the parallel narration in 22:9 that they saw the light) but it does not address them. Voice: Saul hears the voice and the voice addresses him by name; the companions hear sound (μὲν τῆς φωνῆς, v. 7—genitive of a sound heard but not understood, distinguished from the accusative τὴν φωνήν of 22:9 referring to articulate speech) but see no one. Sight: Saul’s eyes open after the encounter and he sees nothing (v. 8); his companions see normally and lead him by the hand. The persecutor who came hunting blind to lead the bound, departs blind and bound to be led. Luke is constructing a deliberate tableau: the man who thought he saw clearly is shown to have been blind all along, and now his outward state matches his inward.
The Lord’s address Σαοὺλ Σαούλ (v. 4) preserves the Semitic doubled vocative form—the same form used of Abraham at the Akedah (Gen 22:11), of Moses at the burning bush (Exod 3:4), of Samuel in the temple (1 Sam 3:10). The list is theophany-by-name, and Luke is placing Saul deliberately in that line. The form is preserved in Hebraized transliteration (Σαούλ rather than Σαῦλος, the Hellenized name Saul carries elsewhere). The Lord uses Saul’s Hebrew name to reach him; the name “Paul” will not appear until 13:9, and it will appear at the moment Saul is named for the first Roman magistrate of his missionary career (Sergius Paulus). Luke is preparing both names theologically.
The question τί με διώκεις (“why are you persecuting me?”) is the chapter’s Christological detonation. The grammar is unambiguous: the persecution Saul has been waging against τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ κυρίου (v. 1) is being identified as persecution of κύριος himself. The me is emphatic; the present διώκεις makes it ongoing. The doctrine of the church as the body of Christ is given here in narrative form before Paul will write it down (1 Cor 12; Rom 12:5; Eph 1:22-23). Saul will spend the rest of his life unfolding what he learned in this one sentence: to lay hands on Christ’s people is to lay hands on Christ. The follow-up self-identification ἐγώ εἰμι Ἰησοῦς (v. 5) keeps the answer crisp: not “I am the Lord of the disciples you are persecuting,” but “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.” The man Saul has been hunting in his disciples is the risen Lord himself.
Saul’s response of κύριε (v. 5) hovers between the polite vocative and the full theological confession. In Hellenistic Greek κύριε can mean simply “sir.” But Luke has already used the term as confession (e.g., 7:59, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”), and the question that follows—τίς εἶ, κύριε—is a request for the identity of the divine figure who has just intervened. The most coherent reading is that Saul addresses the figure as “Lord” in the suspended sense: he knows he is talking to a divine voice and asks which divine voice. The answer reorganizes his entire theology in one phrase. The man he had taken for a crucified messianic pretender is the Lord in glory, identified with his persecuted disciples on earth.
The three-day blindness of v. 9 is more than a narrative detail. The accusative of duration ἡμέρας τρεῖς places the period in deliberate parallel with the three days from crucifixion to resurrection. Saul does not eat or drink; he is in a kind of tomb-state. The pattern is Jewish-mystical: a death-like seclusion before the new life of vision. He emerges in v. 18 with scales falling from his eyes (ἀπέπεσαν…ὡς λεπίδες), receives baptism, takes food, is strengthened. The structure of Saul’s conversion mirrors the death-burial-resurrection structure that Paul will later make foundational for his theology of baptism (Rom 6:3-4): the persecutor died on the road, was buried in three days of darkness, rose to be the apostle. Luke is showing—not arguing—that the Pauline theology of dying-and-rising-with-Christ was etched into Saul’s own conversion before he ever wrote it down.
The voice from heaven did not say, “why are you persecuting my disciples?” It said, “why are you persecuting me?” The first sentence Saul hears from the risen Christ is the doctrine he will spend the rest of his life unfolding: to touch the church is to touch its Lord, and to be united to one disciple is to be united to him.
The narrative unfolds through a carefully balanced structure of divine speech and human response. Verses 10-12 present the Lord's initial command to Ananias, framed by the double use of horama (vision) to emphasize the supernatural coordination of events. The Lord's speech employs staccato imperatives—anastas poreuthēti ('get up, go'), zētēson ('inquire')—creating urgency. The parenthetical idou gar proseuchetai ('for behold, he is praying') is rhetorically brilliant: it reframes the feared persecutor as a supplicant, vulnerable and seeking. The perfect tense eiden ('he has seen') in verse 12 indicates that Saul's vision is a completed reality, awaiting only Ananias's obedience to be fulfilled.
Ananias's objection (vv. 13-14) is structured as a respectful but firm protest, introduced by the adversative de and the vocative Kyrie. His argument moves from hearsay evidence (ēkousa apo pollōn, 'I have heard from many') to specific accusation (hosa kaka, 'how much harm') to present danger (kai hōde echei exousian, 'and here he has authority'). The articular participle tous epikaloumenous to onoma sou ('those who call on Your name') is theologically loaded, echoing Joel 2:32 and establishing the early Christian community's identity through invocation of Jesus' name. Ananias is not merely afraid; he is advocating for the safety of 'Your saints,' appealing to the Lord's own covenant loyalty.
The Lord's response (vv. 15-16) is a divine override, beginning with the emphatic imperative poreuou ('go!') followed by the explanatory hoti ('because'). The metaphor skeuos eklogēs ('chosen instrument') is fronted for emphasis, and the purpose clause tou bastasai to onoma mou ('to bear My name') defines Saul's entire vocation. The triadic audience—enōpion ethnōn te kai basileōn huiōn te Israēl ('before Gentiles and kings and sons of Israel')—maps the geographical and social scope of Acts 13-28. Verse 16 introduces the paradox of Paul's ministry: the future indicative hypodeixō ('I will show') governs the indirect question hosa dei auton pathein ('how much he must suffer'). The divine necessity (dei) of suffering is not incidental but constitutive of bearing Christ's name.
The fulfillment scene (vv. 17-19a) moves with swift, almost liturgical precision. Ananias's obedience is narrated in two aorist verbs—apēlthen, eisēlthen—before the climactic moment of touch and speech. His address Saoul adelphe ('Brother Saul') enacts the reconciliation verbally before the Spirit enacts it pneumatologically. The purpose clauses hopōs anablepsēs kai plēsthēs pneumatos hagiou ('so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit') link physical and spiritual restoration as simultaneous divine gifts. The adverb eutheōs ('immediately') in verse 18 underscores the instantaneous nature of the healing, and the sequence of aorist verbs—apepesan ('fell'), aneblepsen ('regained sight'), anastas ('got up'), ebaptisthē ('was baptized')—creates a rapid narrative crescendo. The final participial phrase kai labōn trophēn enischysen ('and taking food he was strengthened') grounds the spiritual drama in bodily reality, preparing Saul for the mission just announced.
God's call often requires us to embrace those we have every human reason to fear, trusting that divine election transforms enemies into instruments of grace. Ananias's obedience—laying hands on the man who came to bind him—is the gospel enacted before it is preached.
Luke structures this passage around a dramatic reversal, using temporal markers and contrasting verbs to highlight the transformation. The section opens with Saul among 'the disciples' (v. 19b), a designation that now includes him—the persecutor has joined the persecuted. The adverb εὐθέως ('immediately,' v. 20) signals the urgency and totality of Saul's about-face: no period of reflection or gradual adjustment, but instant public proclamation. The imperfect tense of ἐκήρυσσεν ('he was proclaiming') emphasizes continuous action, while the present tense of the content clause (ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν, 'that this one is') underscores the timeless truth being announced: Jesus is the Son of God. Luke's choice to introduce Saul's message with this exalted christological title rather than 'Messiah' or 'Lord' is striking—it goes directly to the heart of Jesus' identity and Saul's Damascus road revelation.
The response in verses 21-22 is structured as a contrast between the hearers' astonishment and Saul's increasing strength. The imperfect ἐξίσταντο ('they were astounded') captures ongoing amazement, while the rhetorical questions (introduced by οὐχ, expecting a positive answer) rehearse Saul's notorious past. The participle πορθήσας ('having destroyed') is aorist, marking his persecution as a completed, definite historical reality, which makes the present reality all the more shocking. Luke then pivots with the adversative δέ ('but,' v. 22) to Saul's response: he 'kept increasing in strength' (imperfect passive ἐνεδυναμοῦτο, emphasizing divine agency) and 'was confounding' (imperfect active συνέχυννεν) the Jews. The present participle συμβιβάζων ('proving') is modal, explaining how he confounded them—through systematic demonstration from Scripture that Jesus is the Christ. The progression is clear: divine empowerment leads to effective argumentation, which produces confusion among opponents.
The plot and escape narrative (vv. 23-25) employs a genitive absolute construction (Ὡς δὲ ἐπληροῦντο ἡμέραι ἱκαναί, 'when sufficient days were being fulfilled') to mark temporal transition, a Lukan stylistic feature that lends solemnity to the narrative. The verb συνεβουλεύσαντο ('they plotted together') is aorist, indicating a definite decision, while the infinitive ἀνελεῖν ('to kill') states their purpose baldly—not to debate or refute, but to eliminate. The passive ἐγνώσθη ('it became known,' v. 24) suggests divine providence in the revelation of the plot, a theme Luke will repeat in Paul's later escapes. The imperfect παρετηροῦντο ('they were watching') portrays sustained surveillance, while the purpose clause (ὅπως αὐτὸν ἀνέλωσιν, 'so that they might kill him') uses the aorist subjunctive to express their intended outcome. The escape itself is narrated with vivid detail: the disciples 'took him' (aorist λαβόντες), 'let him down' (aorist καθῆκαν), 'lowering' (aorist participle χαλάσαντες) him 'in a large basket' (ἐν σπυρίδι). The string of aorist verbs creates a rapid sequence, while the specific mention of the basket adds both historical verisimilitude and theological irony—the mighty persecutor exits as a fugitive in a fish hamper.
Theologically, Luke is establishing patterns that will recur throughout Acts: immediate, bold proclamation following conversion; divine empowerment for witness; scriptural argumentation as the means of persuasion; and violent opposition from those who reject the message. The passive voice of ἐνεδυναμοῦτο ('he was being strengthened') is a divine passive, indicating that God is the source of Saul's increasing power—a crucial point for Luke's pneumatology. The content of Saul's preaching moves from 'Son of God' (v. 20) to 'the Christ' (v. 22), encompassing both divine identity and messianic fulfillment. The plot against Saul (vv. 23-24) fulfills Ananias's prophecy that he would suffer for Christ's name (9:16) and ironically places him in the position of those he formerly persecuted. The escape through the wall (v. 25) is both humiliating and providential, demonstrating that God's purposes for Saul cannot be thwarted by human conspiracy. Luke's reference to 'his disciples' (v. 25) is poignant—Saul now has disciples, a community that protects him as he once sought to destroy them.
The persecutor's first sermon is his own biography inverted: the one who came to bind now proclaims freedom, the destroyer now builds up, the enemy of the Name now heralds it in the very synagogues where he intended to silence it. Conversion is not merely a change of mind but a reversal of mission—and it begins immediately, publicly, and at great cost.
The passage divides into three movements: Saul's rejection (v. 26), Saul's reception (vv. 27-30), and the church's rest (v. 31). The opening genitive absolute (Παραγενόμενος δὲ εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ) sets the scene with Saul's arrival, but the main verb ἐπείραζεν (imperfect: 'he was trying') immediately signals frustration. The infinitive κολλᾶσθαι ('to join') is conative—attempted but not achieved. Luke piles up the obstacles: 'all' (πάντες) were afraid, 'not believing' (μὴ πιστεύοντες) he was a disciple. The participial phrase μὴ πιστεύοντες ὅτι ἐστὶν μαθητής explains their fear: they suspected a trap. The irony is thick—the one who has genuinely become a disciple cannot convince the disciples of his discipleship.
Verse 27 pivots with the strong adversative δὲ and introduces Barnabas as the solution. The participle ἐπιλαβόμενος ('taking hold of') suggests decisive action—Barnabas physically takes Saul and brings him to the apostles. The verb διηγήσατο ('he described, narrated') indicates a full account, not a brief introduction. Luke gives us the content in indirect discourse: Barnabas recounts the Damascus road encounter (πῶς... εἶδεν τὸν κύριον), the Lord's speech to Saul (ὅτι ἐλάλησεν αὐτῷ), and Saul's bold preaching (πῶς... ἐπαρρησιάσατο). The repetition of πῶς ('how') emphasizes the manner and reality of these events—Barnabas is providing evidence, not mere testimony. The phrase ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ('in the name of Jesus') appears twice (vv. 27-28), framing Saul's ministry and indicating its authorization.
Verses 28-30 narrate Saul's brief Jerusalem ministry with rapid-fire participles: εἰσπορευόμενος καὶ ἐκπορευόμενος ('going in and going out')—a Hebraic idiom for free movement and full participation (cf. Num 27:17; Deut 28:6). The present participle παρρησιαζόμενος ('speaking boldly') characterizes his activity. But verse 29 introduces the conflict: he was 'talking and arguing' (ἐλάλει τε καὶ συνεζήτει) with the Hellenists, who 'were attempting to kill him' (ἐπεχείρουν ἀνελεῖν). The imperfect tenses suggest ongoing, escalating tension. The brothers' response (v. 30) is swift: two aorist verbs (κατήγαγον, ἐξαπέστειλαν) indicate decisive action to remove Saul from danger. The geographical movement from Jerusalem to Caesarea to Tarsus traces Saul's exit from the narrative—for now.
Verse 31 functions as a summary statement, one of several in Acts marking transitions (cf. 2:47; 6:7; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20). The singular ἐκκλησία ('the church') is striking—Luke views the communities throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria as one entity. The verb εἶχεν εἰρήνην ('had peace') may be causative: Saul's departure brought peace, since his presence provoked persecution. Yet the peace is not mere absence of conflict but the context for growth. Three present participles describe the church's condition: οἰκοδομουμένη ('being built up'), πορευομένη ('going on, walking'), and the main verb ἐπληθύνετο ('it was multiplying'). The datives τῷ φόβῳ τοῦ κυρίου and τῇ παρακλήσει τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος are either instrumental ('by means of') or sphere ('in the realm of')—the church walks in reverence for the Lord and in the Spirit's encouragement, and as a result, it multiplies. The verse is a theological statement: healthy churches grow not through technique but through godly fear and Spirit-given comfort.
The church's greatest threats often become its greatest assets once grace intervenes—but only when a Barnabas is willing to risk reputation to extend trust. Multiplication follows not from the absence of opposition but from the presence of the Spirit's comfort amid the fear of the Lord.
Luke pivots the chapter from Saul’s call back to Peter for a deliberate structural reason: the geography is moving toward Cornelius. Verse 32 places Peter διερχόμενον διὰ πάντων (“passing through all parts”)—a Lukan summary phrase that signals an itinerant pastoral visitation. He is moving northwest from Jerusalem into the Sharon plain, which is precisely the route to Caesarea where Cornelius will be encountered in chapter 10. The word κατελθεῖν (“he came down,” v. 32) sustains Lukan altitude-vocabulary: down from Jerusalem’s elevation to the coastal plain. Two coastal-Gentile-frontier locations frame Peter’s itinerary: Lydda (modern Lod), an old Benjaminite town now a mixed coastal community, and Joppa, the ancient port from which Jonah fled when commanded to preach to a Gentile city (Jonah 1:3). The geographical resonance is not accidental.
The Aeneas miracle (vv. 33-35) is told with Lukan economy. The detail ἐξ ἐτῶν ὀκτὼ (“for eight years,” v. 33) establishes the depth of incapacity, much as the thirty-eight years did for the John 5 paralytic. Peter’s words ἰᾶταί σε Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (“Jesus Christ heals you,” v. 34) are exactly the apostolic theology Luke has been showing throughout: the present tense ἰᾶταί does not say “I heal” or “I will pray and Jesus will heal” but “Jesus heals you,” right now, through this apostolic word. The two imperatives that follow—ἀνάστηθι καὶ στρῶσον σεαυτῷ (“rise and make your bed”)—deliberately echo Jesus’ word to the Capernaum paralytic (Mk 2:11; Lk 5:24). Peter is not improvising; he is repeating, in the name of Jesus, what Jesus did. The aorist ἀνέστη (“he rose”) is paired with the chapter’s baptismal verb—the resurrection-vocabulary of Saul’s ἀναστὰς (v. 6, “rise”) and Tabitha’s ἀνάστηθι (v. 40) are deliberately knit by the same root.
Verse 35’s response is theologically loaded: πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες Λύδδα καὶ τὸν Σαρῶνα…ἐπέστρεψαν ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον (“all who dwelt in Lydda and Sharon…turned to the Lord”). The verb ἐπιστρέφω is Luke’s primary conversion-verb (cf. 11:21; 14:15; 15:19; 26:18, 20). The Sharon plain was a region of mixed Jewish and Gentile population, agriculturally lush, prophetically named in Isaiah 35:2 LXX as the locale of messianic restoration: ἡ δόξα τοῦ Λιβάνου ἐδόθη αὐτῇ καὶ ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ Καρμήλου, “the glory of Lebanon was given to her and the beauty of Carmel; my people will see the glory of the Lord.” Luke is signaling that Sharon’s “turning” is the prophetic landscape activating in Peter’s wake.
The Tabitha episode (vv. 36-42) is the only NT resurrection performed by an apostle outside the gospel narratives. Luke loads it with deliberate Old- and New-Testament echo. Tabitha’s name is the Aramaic for “gazelle”; Dorcas is the Greek translation. Luke’s parenthetical translation (ἣ διερμηνευομένη λέγεται Δορκάς) marks her doubled identity: Aramaic-Jewish and Greek, fitting for a Joppa community on the cultural seam. The descriptor πλήρης ἔργων ἀγαθῶν καὶ ἐλεημοσυνῶν (“full of good works and acts of charity”) is the rare Lukan formula for women whose ministry of practical mercy was the structural backbone of community life (cf. Lk 8:2-3 of Mary, Joanna, and Susanna). The widows showing the χιτῶνας καὶ ἱμάτια (“tunics and outer garments,” v. 39) Tabitha had made are the practical evidence of her ministry: she clothed the destitute. The widow-and-tunic specificity is Lukan ethics in concrete form.
Peter’s resurrection-procedure (vv. 40-41) is structured as deliberate replication of Jesus’ raising of Jairus’ daughter (Lk 8:54; Mk 5:40-41). The verbal sequence is identical: he sends them all out (ἐκβαλὼν…ἔξω πάντας); he addresses the body (πρὸς τὸ σῶμα); his command is one word in the imperative (Ταβιθά, ἀνάστηθι; cf. Jesus’ ταλιθὰ κούμ); the woman opens her eyes and sits up; he gives her his hand. The auditory parallel between Ταβιθά and ταλιθά (the Aramaic of Jesus’ word in Mark 5:41) is striking and almost certainly intentional. Peter is doing in Jesus’ name what Jesus once did in Galilee. But Luke marks one critical difference: before he speaks, Peter θεὶς τὰ γόνατα προσηύξατο (“kneeling, prayed,” v. 40). Jesus does not pray before raising Jairus’ daughter; he commands. Peter must pray. The grammar of Christology is preserved in the choreography: the apostle is not the Lord; he stands as servant in the line of authority that flows from the Lord.
The chapter ends with what looks like a footnote but is actually a hinge: ἔμεινεν…ἐν Ἰόππῃ παρά τινι Σίμωνι βυρσεῖ (“he stayed…in Joppa with one Simon a tanner,” v. 43). The detail is anything but incidental. Tanners worked with carcasses and were ritually problematic in stricter halakhic communities; the Mishnah (m. Ketub. 7.10) eventually classifies tannery alongside leather-working as a profession that gives a wife grounds for divorce because of the smell. For a Galilean apostle of Jewish background to lodge παρά τινι Σίμωνι βυρσεῖ is a deliberate softening of purity boundaries. Luke is positioning Peter, geographically and ritually, exactly where the Cornelius episode of chapter 10 will require him to be. The vision of unclean animals will come down to Peter on the roof of a tanner’s house in a port city facing the Mediterranean. The man who could not stay clean in Simon’s house is the man who will be told that nothing God has cleansed should be called common.
The ten-verse coda functions structurally for the whole chapter. Saul’s call has been told (vv. 1-31); now Peter’s preparation begins. Both apostles are being readied for the same Gentile mission, by different paths—Saul by the road to Damascus, Peter by the road from Lydda to Joppa to a tanner’s house. The chapter that began with the most violent persecutor of the church being addressed by name from heaven ends with the apostle of Jewish privilege staying many days in a ritually-uncertain household. The two trajectories will converge in chapters 10-15 when Peter and Saul together work out what the gospel does to the Jew-Gentile boundary.
The chapter that opens on the road to Damascus closes at a tanner’s house in Joppa. Saul has been turned around toward the Gentiles by a voice from heaven; Peter is being turned in the same direction by a slow walk down the coast and an evening’s lodging where his fathers would have hesitated. The two trajectories are different, but the destination is the same.
The Sharon plain’s “turning to the Lord” (v. 35) activates Isaiah 35, where Sharon’s flowering is the visible sign of messianic restoration: “they will see the glory of Yahweh, the majesty of our God” (Isa 35:2). The same chapter promises that “the eyes of the blind will be opened…then will the lame leap like a deer” (35:5-6). Luke has just narrated the opening of Saul’s eyes (9:18) and the leaping-up of Aeneas the paralytic (9:34). The Isaiah 35 oracle is being narrated as fulfilled history. LSB’s “Yahweh” in Isaiah 35:2 makes the divine-name continuity visible: it is Yahweh’s glory the prophets predicted, and it is the κύριος Ἰησοῦς Luke names as the agent.
Tabitha’s resurrection echoes the prophetic resurrections of Elijah (1 Kings 17:17-24, the widow of Zarephath’s son) and Elisha (2 Kings 4:32-37, the Shunammite’s son). In both OT scenes, the prophet shuts the door, prays, and the dead child is restored to the mother. Peter follows the same choreography: he sends them out, kneels, prays, raises. Even more closely, the scene rehearses Mark 5:40-41 (Jairus’ daughter), with the auditory pun Ταβιθά-ταλιθά. Luke is showing a single line of resurrection-authority running from Elijah through Elisha through Jesus through Peter, with the apostolic moment marked off by Peter’s prayer—the apostle does not have the Son’s authority by nature; he calls on it.
“Jesus Christ heals you” for ἰᾶταί σε Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (v. 34). LSB keeps the present tense of ἰᾶταί rather than rendering “has healed” or “will heal.” The grammar is theological: the risen Christ is the present-tense subject of the healing verb, not Peter and not a past Jesus.
“Acts of charity” for ἐλεημοσυνῶν (v. 36). LSB resists the temptation to translate ἐλεημοσύνη as “alms” (which has narrowed to mean coins given to beggars) and preserves the broader Jewish-covenantal range—practical mercies of every kind. The corresponding LXX-Hebrew background is צְדָקָה (tsedaqah, righteousness-as-mercy), which collapses the modern English split between “justice” and “charity.”
“Tabitha, arise” for Ταβιθά, ἀνάστηθι (v. 40). LSB keeps the Aramaic name in transliteration and uses the resurrection-charged English “arise” (rather than smoothing to “get up”). The choice preserves both the auditory pun with the ταλιθά of Jesus’ word in Mark 5:41 and the theological force of ἀνίστημι as the New Testament’s primary resurrection-verb.
“A tanner named Simon” for Σίμωνι βυρσεῖ (v. 43). LSB keeps βυρσεύς as “tanner” without softening to “leather-worker” or omitting the occupational note. The choice preserves the ritual-purity edge that the chapter 10 vision will then explicitly address.