Center for Metanoia Studies (Centre d'Etudes Interdisciplinaires de la Métanoïa)

by Peter John McGregor, Catholic Institute of Sydney

Repentance and Conversion in the Lukan Corpus – the Current Situation

As Joel Green has pointed out, the motifs of repentance and conversion in the Gospel according to Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are ubiquitous. From the very beginning of his Gospel, Luke focuses on God’s desire for people to turn (epistrephō) to him.[1] We are told that, in his ministry, John the Baptist

will turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God, and he will go before him. . . to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the understanding of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared (Lk 1:16–17).

This focus on repentance and conversion continues through Luke’s two volume narrative. John proclaims a “baptism of repentance” (Lk 3:3), and exhorts those who come to him to “produce therefore fruits worthy of repentance” (Lk 3:8). Jesus states that he has come to call “sinners to repentance” (Lk 5:32), and the risen Lord tells his disciples “that repentance unto forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all nations” (Lk 24:47). On the day of Pentecost, Peter tells his listeners to “Repent, and be baptised every one of you for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Paul sums up his ministry as announcing to Jew and Gentile “that they should repent and turn to God, doing works worthy of repentance” (Acts 26:20).

As Green also points out, the centrality of repentance and conversion in Luke and Acts is supported by recent scholarship.[2] Of the twenty-two occurrences of metanoia (repentance) and thirty-four of metanoeō (to repent) in the New Testament, twenty-five instances of the noun or the verb, almost half of the total, are to be found in Luke and Acts.[3] As shall be seen, the terms apostrepho (to turn away), with one occurrence (cf. Acts 3:26), and epistello apo (to turn from), with one occurrence (cf. Acts 26:18), also will be relevant to our understanding of repentance and conversion. The terms epistrephō and epistrophē, used in the sense of “conversion,” to turn to God, are found less often, through mostly in the Lukan corpus.[4] However, Green also shows that this recognition of the centrality of repentance and conversion in Luke and Acts has not led to much substantial study of these concepts. Nor has it led to a general agreement as to what Luke means by conversion. For one thing, there has been a tendency to focus on conversion in Acts and a neglect of it in the Gospel. Or, if a study has looked at conversion in both works, it has tended to be limited in scope.[5] As Green maintains, there has been

[a] surprising, general lack of explicit, critical reflection concerning how the biblical writers seem to have defined conversion. . . . recent study of the motif in Luke-Acts has focused on an array of significant and relevant issues – for example, whether conversion is a moral or a cognitive category, what conversion is from and/or to, or whether conversion and repentance are discrete categories. What conversion entails, however – how best to define conversion for Luke-Acts – seems largely to have been assumed.[6]

In investigating what Luke actually means by the terms repentance and conversion, the term “conversion” will be used in two senses. The first is conversion as a part of a process – the partial sense. This is the sense in which conversion is coupled with repentance. The second is conversion as the whole process – the plenary sense.

The standard literal meaning given to metanoeō (to repent) and metanoia (repentance) in the New Testament is “to change one’s mind”.[7] For epistrephō (to convert) and epistrophē (conversion) it is “to turn around” and “to turn towards”.[8] Given greater space, it should be possible to trace the meaning of metanoia, metanoeō, epistrephō, and epistrophē from their original Greek meaning, through the Old Testament, looking at Hellenistic Jewish literature, especially the Septuagint, and how it translates the Masoretic text, then using all this as a basis for helping to establish the meaning of the terms in the Lukan corpus. However, the method followed here, as achievable within the limitations of an article, will be to establish their meaning contextually, that is, by taking their accepted literal meanings, and then see how and where Luke uses the terms and what other phenomena he associates with them. As Green points out, it is important that conversion be defined, since the definition “will determine what one looks for in the Lukan narrative and how one knows when one has found it”.[9] Determining the definition of conversion for Luke will help us to identify and understand passages which are about conversion, but do not use terms such as metanoia, metanoeō, epistrephō, and epistrephē, for example, the conversions of the Ethiopian eunuch and Saul. Again, space will not permit this investigation to look at these conversion narratives, or that of Cornelius (cf. Acts 8:26–39, 9:1–19, 10:1–11:18).[10]

The Kardia in Sacred Scripture

If there has been little scholarly investigation into Luke’s definition of “conversion,” when it comes to what he might mean by the term “heart” I am not aware of any. For this reason, some account of how the term “heart” as used in Sacred Scripture needs to be given before addressing the question of what Luke means by the term. A contextual approach alone will not suffice.

In Sacred Scripture we find that “heart” is used in many different senses. Besides being the seat of the emotions, it is the place of knowing, willing, and conscience.[11] According to Hugo Rahner, in the Old Testament:

“Heart” is the principle and organ of the personal life of man, the center in which the being and the activity of man as a spiritual personality are concentrated, and consequently the source and center of his religious and ethical life.[12]

If we look at the New Testament, we find that the term kardia is sometimes used in contradistinction to the mind, to the soul, to the soul and mind, and to the conscience.[13] However, it is more often used in the following senses. As the affective centre of the human person it is the locus of the passions. As the intellectual centre of the human person it is the locus of thought, understanding, doubt and questioning, deception and belief. As the volitional centre of the human person it is the locus of intention and decision. The heart is also the locus of imagination and memory. As the moral centre of the human person it is the locus of virtue, including theological virtue. It is the locus of conscience. It is the locus of that holiness which is normally called singleness or purity of heart. It is the locus of relation with other human persons.[14]

According to Sacred Scripture, the heart thinks, chooses, feels, imagines, remembers and relates to others. If it does all these things it cannot simply be any one of these things, but must be the interrelatedness of all these things. As it happens, this is Joseph Ratzinger’s understanding of the heart. It is “the interior dimension of understanding where sense and spirit, reason and feeling, interior and exterior perception interpenetrate circumincessively”.[15] For him, the heart is not to be identified simply with the intellect, or the will, or the passions, or the senses, or the body, or the soul. Nor is it to be identified with the ego. The heart is not identical with the person. Rather, for Ratzinger, it is the “place” of the integration of the intellect, will, passions, and senses, of the body and the soul. One could say that, for him, the human heart is the personal integration, the integration by the person, of these aspects of their human nature.[16]

The heart is also the locus of relation with God. It is the place which God searches and knows. It is the locus of revelation, as well as that refusal of revelation which is often called “hardness of heart”. It is also the locus of God’s indwelling, in Christ.[17] Ratzinger also agrees with this aspect of the biblical understanding of the heart. Combining this insight with his concept of the heart as the integration of the human person, he holds that:

The organ for seeing God is the heart. The intellect alone is not enough. In order for man to become capable of perceiving God, the energies of his existence have to work in harmony. His will must be pure and so too must the underlying affective dimension of his soul, which gives intelligence and will their direction. Speaking of the heart in this way means precisely that man’s perceptive powers play in concert, which also requires the proper interplay of body and soul, since this is essential for the totality of the creature we call “man”. Man’s fundamental affective disposition actually depends on just this unity of body and soul and on man’s acceptance of being both body and spirit. This means he places the body under the discipline of the spirit, yet does not isolate intellect or will. Rather, he accepts himself as coming from God, and thereby also acknowledges and lives out the bodiliness of his existence as an enrichment for the spirit. The heart – the wholeness of man – must be pure, interiorly open and free, in order for man to be able to see God.[18]

How is God revealed in the heart? The Acts of the Apostles consistently speaks of Christians being “filled with the Holy Spirit,” or being “full of the Spirit”. Christians become the dwelling place of the Spirit. Yet, although the Holy Spirit is presented as enlightening and renewing the minds of Christians, and inspiring peace and joy in Christians, neither the mind nor the passions are presented as the dwelling place of the Spirit.[19] The place which is thus presented is the heart. “God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Gal 4:6). It is by searching the hearts of Christians when they pray in the Spirit that God “knows what is the mind of the Spirit” (Rom 8:27). Furthermore: “[God] has set his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee” (2 Cor 1:22). This guarantee is the love of God which “has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Rom 5:5).

The Meaning of Repentance according to Luke

An analysis of how Luke uses the terms metanoia and metanoeō yields the following data. To begin with, “repentance” can be placed in three chronological contexts: those of John the Baptist, Jesus the Christ, and the apostles of Jesus. In the case of John, five things are associated with repentance. John preaches a “baptism” of repentance (cf. Lk 3:8, Acts 13:24 & 19:4) which is “for the forgiveness of sins” (Lk 3:8). It is preached to “all the people of Israel” (Acts 13:24), and it requires them “to believe in the one who was a come after him” (Acts 19:4). This repentance requires “fruits” (Lk 3:8), which are the sharing of possessions and food (cf. Lk 3:11), and the just treatment of others (cf. Lk 3:12–14).

In the case of Jesus, repentance is a “call” to “sinners” (cf. Lk 5:32), a call which is still limited to Israel. It also requires “fruits” – showing mercy to the poor (cf. Lk 16:30), and the exercise of justice, as in the seeking of forgiveness from a person whom one has wronged (cf. Lk 17:3–4). Other fruits of repentance are the putting on of sackcloth and ashes, fasting, begging God’s forgiveness, and turning from evil (cf. Lk 10:13 & 11:32; Jon 3:6–9). Death will be the fate of those who do not repent (cf. Lk 13:3–5), and those sinners who do repent will cause great joy in heaven (cf. Lk 15:7 & 10). The one substantial difference between the calls of John and Jesus to repentance is that Jesus does not preach a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins,” but forgives sins without the need for any kind of baptism (cf. Lk 5:20 & 7:48). It would seem that immediate faith in and love for the present, tangible Jesus substitutes for baptism, or rather that baptism substitutes for immediate faith in and love for the present, tangible Jesus (cf. Lk 5:20 & 7:47).

In the case of the apostles of Jesus, in the name of Jesus they are instructed to preach repentance for the forgiveness of sins (cf. Lk 24:47). One repents of, turns from, wickedness, that is, sin, in order to be forgiven (cf. Acts 8:22 & 3:26). This repentance, along with baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, is not just a call from the apostles but also a gift from the exalted Jesus to Israel (cf. Acts 2:38 & 5:31). Furthermore, it is not limited to Israel, but is also a command of God to all people everywhere (cf. Acts 17:30). Not only is this repentance a command of God, but it is a blessing from him. It is God who turns people from their wickedness (cf. Acts 3:26). The immediate effect of this repentance and baptism for the forgiveness of sins is a further result which is variously called “life” (zoen), “times of refreshment from the presence of the Lord [God],” and “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 11:18, 3:19–20 & 2:38). This repentance is “toward God” and also “toward faith in [the] Lord Jesus” (Acts 20:21). It is also linked with conversion, that is, “turning again” to God “that sins may be wiped away” (Acts 3:19). The ultimate result of this repentance, forgiveness of sins, and times of refreshment from the Lord will be the sending by God of the fore-appointed Christ Jesus (cf. Acts 3:19–20). There is also a phenomenon mentioned that might be called an “anti-repentance,” of which Stephen speaks in his address to the Sanhedrin. After allowing Moses to lead them out of Egypt, and agreeing to obey the “living oracles” which he gave them from God, the Israelites “refused to obey him [Moses], but thrust him aside, and in their hearts they turned to Egypt, saying to Aaron, ‘Make for us gods to go before us’” (Acts 7:38–40).

What can be concluded from the foregoing analysis is that “repentance” refers to a particular aspect of a whole process. This aspect is that of accepting a double revelation – the truth about God, and how one stands before God. In this process, “repentance” is the acknowledgement for one’s sinfulness and a turning away from sin.

The meaning of Conversion – in the partial sense – according to Luke

As a part of the whole process of turning from sin and turning to God, epistrephō and epistrophē, Luke uses the terms thirteen times in the sense of turning to God. Of these, ten are found in the Acts of the Apostles, while two are applied to John the Baptist, and one is used by Jesus.[20] With regard to John, the angel of the Lord prophesises that “he will turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God” (Lk 1:16). In doing so, he will also be turn them to their neighbours and to justice. John will “turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the disobedient to the understanding of the just” (Lk 1:17). This turning will prepare them for the coming of the Lord (cf. Lk 1:17).

The only time that Jesus uses this term is with regard to Simon Peter’s denial. Satan is permitted to put Simon to the test, but after his failure, Peter will return to Jesus. As with the turning to God at the exhortation of John, this return will also affect Peter’s ability to keep not only the first great commandment, but also the second – he will be able to support his brothers (cf. Lk 22:31–34).

In the Acts of the Apostles, it is initially only Jews who turn to the Lord (Acts 3:19). However, soon many Gentiles are turning to the Lord (cf. Acts 11:20–21, 15:3 & 15:19). Turning to the Lord is presented as part of one movement of re-orientation. “Repentance” emphasises what one is turning from, “conversion” what one is turning to.[21] Paul tells the people of Lystra that the good news that he and Barnabas bring is that “you should turn from these vain things [their gods] to a living God who made the heaven and the earth and sea and all that is in them” (Acts 14:15). Turning to the Lord is a prerequisite for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 3:19). It can only occur if it is proceeded by believing in the Lord. In a subtle way, Luke connects believing and turning, showing both their unity and distinction. So, all the residents of Lydda and Sharon, upon seeing a paralytic named Aeneas, who had been healed by Peter, turned to the Lord (cf. Acts 9:33–35). Then many of the people of Joppa, upon hearing that Peter had raised Tabitha from the dead, believed in the Lord (cf. Acts 9:40–42).[22] When disciples from Cypus and Cyrene preach the Lord Jesus to Greeks in Antioch, “a great number that believed turned to the Lord” (Acts 11:21). Finally, in words reminiscent of John the Baptist, Paul tells Herod Agrippa that he told both Jews and Gentiles that repenting and turning to God must be followed by the performance of deeds worthy of repentance (cf. Acts 26:20).

Some scholars maintain that there is no need to distinguish between repentance and conversion, that the two can be treated as synonyms.[23] Certainly, it is correct that they can be seen as parts of one movement, or ways of looking at one movement from particular perspectives, but the movement can be incomplete. For example, even though not in the Lukan corpus, we are told that Judas repented (metameletheìs), but that his repentance did not save him. He did not believe in the possibility of being reconciled with Jesus, but despaired and hanged himself (cf. Matt 27:2–5). This repentance was not mere remorse without action. The fact that Judas admitted that he had done wrong and rejected his ill-gotten gains shows that he acted upon his remorse. Furthermore, whenever this particular term is used in the New Testament, it indicates an active turning from something (cf. Mt 21:29 & 32, 2 Cor 7:8, Heb 7:21). Judas repents, but without re-turning to the Lord.[24] In Acts, the account of Simon the magician shows that it is possible for a person to attempt to turn to the Lord without turning from evil, that is, to believe without repenting (cf. Mk 1:15, where Jesus defines the re-orientation to God with the command to “repent [metanoîete] and believe in the Gospel”). When the Samaritans who hear Philip’s proclamation of the good news and see his healings and exorcisms believe in Jesus Christ and are baptised, we are told that Simon also believed and was baptised. Yet when he attempts to buy the apostolic power to impart the gift of the Holy Spirit, Peter says to him, “your heart is not straight (euthia) with God. Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of unrighteousness” (Acts 8:21–23). Simon has attempted to turn to the Lord without first turning from wickedness. His heart was still “crooked”. However, his position is not irretrievable. He can still turn to the Lord in prayer and have the wicked intention of his heart forgiven.

What can be concluded from the foregoing analysis is that “conversion,” “turning to” the Lord, refers to a particular aspect of a whole process. This aspect is in the nature of a re-orientation wherein one comes into the light and does what is right. One now lives for God. It depends on believing in the Lord and repentance for sins, and results in forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. To be authentic, it must produce deeds worthy of repentance.

Repentance and Conversion according to Luke

The most complete, though not comprehensive, statement about repentance and conversion is to be found in Paul’s address to Herod Agrippa, where he explains his apostolic call:

But rise and stand upon your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you to serve and bear witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, delivering you from the people and from the Gentiles – to whom I send you to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me. “Wherefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared first to those at Damascus, then at Jerusalem and throughout all the country of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God and perform deeds worthy of their repentance” (Acts 26:16–20).

We can see from this passage that Paul is sent to open eyes, to reveal something from God. This purpose of this revelation is to prompt a turning, which is not from anything “neutral,” but from darkness and the power of Satan to light and God. This turning to God includes being set free from an evil power and having faith in Jesus. The result of this turning is the gift of forgiveness of sins, a wiping away of sins, and deeds that are commensurate with this turning. Faith in Jesus makes a person holy, and includes one in the community of the holy ones. Moreover, from the other passages which have been addressed one can see that incorporation in the sanctified takes place through baptism as well as faith. The gift of sanctification, from God, through his Christ, is zoe, refreshment, the Holy Spirit, the ultimate fulfilment of which is the return of the Christ.

The use of Kardia by Luke

The term kardia is used more frequently by Luke than by any of the other evangelists. Matthew uses the term fourteen times, Mark thirteen, and John seven, but in the Gospel according to Luke it is used twenty times, and in the Acts of the Apostles twenty-one times.[25] Furthermore, uniquely in the New Testament, Luke twice has people “smiting the breast,” the place of the heart; the tax collector who says “God, be merciful to me a sinner” (Lk 18:13), and the people who assemble to see Jesus die (cf. Lk 23:48).

What is more, in four Lukan texts which use the term, and which have parallels in Matthew, Luke adds the term in two. Thus, in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus says, “Brood of vipers. How can you speak good things when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good things, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil things” (12:34–35). In Luke, however, Jesus says, “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good, and the evil man out of evil brings forth evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks” (6:45). An even more obvious addition is in the parable of the sower. In Matthew, Jesus says, “When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand, the evil one comes and seizes what has been sown in his heart” (13:19). Yet in Luke, Jesus says “And the ones by the way are those who hear; then the devil comes and takes the word from their heart, lest they believe and be saved. . . . And the ones in the good soil are those who hear the word with a worthy and good heart, hold fast to it, and bear fruit with patience” (8:12 & 15). In Luke, Jesus contrasts two hearts, those from whom the devil snatches the word, and those whose worthy and good hearts hold fast to the word and bear fruit.

What does Luke mean by Kardia?

Like the other Evangelists, Luke’s use of the term “heart” in both his Gospel and in Acts reflects its use in the Old Testament, where the heart is not just the centre of the affective life, but is also the centre of thought, choice, memory, and personal relationships, the place of openness or lack of openness to God, the place where God acts and even dwells. It is, but is much more, than the place of the passions (cf. Acts 2:46, 14:17 & 21:13). God knows the heart (cf. Lk 16:15, Acts 1:24 & 15:8). He opens and cleanses the heart through faith (Acts 15:9 & 16:14). He moves the heart to love others (cf. Lk 1:17), and one loves or fails to love God from the heart (cf. Lk 10:27 & 12:34, Acts 7:39 & 51, 8:21–22 & 28:27). God defeats the understanding of proud hearts (cf. Lk 1:51). People remember in their hearts (cf. Lk 1:66 & 2:19). They reflect upon things in their hearts (cf. Lk 2:19 & 2:51). They think and question in their hearts (cf. Lk 2:35, 3:15, 5:22, 9:47 & 24:38). Their words and deeds originate in their hearts (cf. Lk 6:45, Acts 5:5 & 7:23). Their hearts can be weighed down by self-indulgence and fear (cf. Lk 21:34). Satan can influence and even fill their hearts (cf. Lk 8:15, 8:22 & Acts 5:3). Their hearts can be slow to believe in God (cf. Lk 24:25), but also be deeply moved by the word of God (cf. Lk 24:32). Luke even has Peter, quoting Psalm 16, speak of the joy of the heart of Jesus in looking forward to his resurrection (cf. Acts 2:26).

The Heart as the Locus of Repentance and Conversion for Luke

For Luke, the heart is the place of repentance and conversion or the lack thereof, and his use of the term expresses his abiding concern for conversion, in the complete sense, throughout his corpus. Certainly, in a number of places, the terms “repentance” and “heart,” and “conversion” and “heart,” are shown together (cf. Acts 2:37–28, 8:21–22, Lk 1:17, Acts 14:15–17 & 28:27).[26] Also, the example given of “anti-repentance” refers to a turning in the heart (cf. Acts 7:39). However, the “heart” as the place of conversion or lack thereof is also extensively shown in other ways. God knows the hearts of human beings (cf. Acts 1:24 & 15:8). He opens their hearts to believe the Gospel, and cleanses their hearts through faith (cf. Acts 16:14 & 15:9). Also, if we compare Luke’s use of the term with that of the other evangelists, not only does Luke add the term “heart” in parallel passages, but the term features prominently at both the beginning and end of his Gospel and Acts, used in a manner which emphasises that the heart is the place of conversion. In Luke’s infancy narrative, the term is used six times. Its very first use speaks of a change of heart. The angel says to Zechariah that, in the mission of the son to be born to him and Elizabeth, this Elijah-like son will “turn the hearts of fathers to the children” (1:17).[27] In response to the good news of the angel Gabriel, Mary prophesies that the fate of the proud, those who refuse this turning, is that God scatters them “in the understanding of their hearts” (1:51). The response to the events surrounding the birth of John by those who hear of them is to put them in their hearts and to ask a question: What then will this child be? (cf. 1:66). Simeon prophesises to Mary that her child will be a sign of contradiction, a sign which will lead to “the thoughts out of many hearts” being revealed (2:35). Finally, we are told twice that Mary kept everything which she experienced about Jesus in her heart, wherein she pondered them (cf. 2:19 & 51).

If we go to the end of Luke’s Gospel we find the term used three times in the road to Emmaus story. First Jesus upbraids the two disciples for being “slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken” (24:35). When he vanishes from their sight they say to each other that their hearts burned within them while he spoke to them on the road (cf. 24:32). Finally, after they have told their story to the eleven and the other disciples, and Jesus appears in the midst of them all, he rebukes them all for the questioning which has arisen in their hearts, their failure, even upon seeing him, to believe in him (cf. 24:36–38).

In the Acts of the Apostles, at its conclusion, Luke mirrors the end of his Gospel when he presents Paul’s final words to the Jews of Rome. To them Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah. Like the disciples who hear and see Jesus, yet have slow and questioning hearts, the perception of the Jews of Rome is characterised thus:

Go to this people, and say, you shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. For this people’s heart has thickened, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and they have closed their eyes; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them (Acts 28:26–27).

Finally, we find the term being used eleven times in the first eight chapters of Acts. The first reminds us that God knows everyone’s heart (cf. 1:24). The second speaks of the joy of the heart of the human Jesus in his foreknowledge of his resurrection (cf. 2:26). The third gives the effect of Peter’s Pentecost address on the hearts of his hearers (cf. 2:37). The fourth tells us that the first believers were all of one heart (cf. 4:32). The fifth and sixth expose the heart of Ananias (cf. 5:3 & 4). The seventh, eighth, and ninth occur in Stephen’s speech to the Sanhedrin (cf. 7:23, 39 & 51). The tenth records the effect of the words of Stephen on the hearts of members of the Sanhedrin (cf. 7:54). Lastly, the eleventh is found in Peter’s warning to Simon the magician (cf. 8:21–22).

It is the third of these occurrences with which I shall begin a deeper analysis of Luke’s use of the term. After Peter has accused the Jews gathered for Pentecost of crucifying the Messiah, who has now been raised from the dead, rather than stoning him and the other apostles, we are told that they were “cut to the heart,” and say to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” (2:37). At least, “cut to the heart” is the translation given by the RSV. However, the Greek term which is used here is katenugesan. It from nusso, a verb which means “to pierce,” and kata, a prefix which intensifies the meaning of the verb. Nusso is the same word used to describe the action of the Roman soldier who pierced the side of Jesus with a spear as he hung on the cross (cf. Jn 19:34). Thus katenugesan means more than “cut”. Rather, “pierced through” or “pierced deeply” would be more accurate translations. “Pricked” in the KJV is a better translation that “cut”.

The result of this being “pierced through to the heart” was an acceptance of the truth of the apostolic words, dismay and remorse about what they have done, and the decision to seek the apostles’ counsel. They chose to accept this counsel. They repented, were baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins, received the gift of the Holy Spirit, and subsequently continued steadfast in the teaching of the apostles, the koinonia, the breaking of the bread, and the prayers (cf. 2:37–42).[28]

Subsequently we are told that this multitude of those who believed were of one kardia and psuche, one heart and soul (cf. 4:32). Consequent upon this oneness of heart and life is that their lives are one. No one “said that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had everything in common” (4:32), no one, that is, except Ananias and Sapphira. The fact that they did not share what they had in common, shows that they were not one in heart and soul with all the other believers. Rather, there was no room for oneness of heart since their hearts were filled with something else which precluded both oneness with God and neighbour. When Ananias lays only a part of the proceeds of the sale of their property at the feet of the apostles, Peter says to him, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit . . . . Why was this action put in your heart?” (5:3 & 4).

Furthermore, in contrast to the hearts that are pierced to the very centre on the day of Pentecost, we have the reaction of the members of the Sanhedrin to the speech of Stephen. In the RSV and ESV their reaction is translated as “they were enraged” (7:54), while many other versions give a similar translation. Certainly, they were enraged, but the KJV gives a more accurate translation – “they were cut to the heart” (dieprionto tais kardiais). This verb diaprio means “to divide with a saw” or “saw asunder”.[29] Metaphorically, their hearts were sawn apart by the words of Stephen. “Enraged’ or “became furious,” another common translation, are not bad translations. They were passionately “sawn asunder”. However, the metaphor is important for understanding what Luke is trying to tell us.

To grasp Luke’s intent, let us look at Stephen’s speech, and an earlier reaction on the part of the Sanhedrin to a speech by Peter and the other apostles. In his speech, Stephen uses the term kardia three times. First, he tells the Sanhedrin that when Moses was forty years old “it came upon his heart to visit his brothers, the sons of Israel” (7:23), even though, in the Old Testament account of this, there is no mention of the heart of Moses (cf. Ex 2:11). Then he reminds them how the people of Israel refused to obey Moses, even after he had led them out of Egypt and given them the living oracles of God at Mount Sinai. Rather, they “thrust him aside and in their hearts turned to Egypt” (7:39). He concludes his speech to them by saying, “Hard-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears, you always oppose the Holy Spirit” (7:51).

It is here maintained that this contrast of “pierced through” and “sawn asunder” hearts is deliberate. This is shown by an earlier use of the verb diaprio in Acts 5:33, one of only two uses of the verb in the New Testament. There we are told that when the high priest, and the Sanhedrin, and all the elders of Israel heard the answer of Peter and the apostles to the questioning of the high priest, an answer wherein they made the same accusation against them as they had made against the crowds at Pentecost, and later was made by Stephen against the Sanhedrin, that of murdering the Messiah, de akousantes dieprioto, the ones hearing were sawn asunder, and intended to kill the apostles (cf. 5:21 & 27–33). Take note that here it does not say that their hearts were sawn asunder.

We know that they did not kill the apostles. Rather, they listened to the words of Gamaliel, who counselled them to leave the apostles alone. They were sawn asunder, but not to the degree that their rage rendered them irrational. They were still able to listen to reason (cf. 5:34–40). However, when their hearts are sawn asunder, they gnash their teeth at Stephen, and when he prophesises in the power of the Holy Spirit about the glory of the Messiah, they refuse his prophecy by drowning him out with a loud voice and covering their ears (cf. 7:54–57). They rush upon Stephen homothymadon, of one accord. Like the believers, their hearts are one, but unlike the hearts of believers, which are drawn into one accord by the Holy Spirit, theirs is a coincidental union caused by their individual opposition to the Holy Spirit, a resistance which results in murderous rage (cf. 2:37, 4:14, 7:51 & 7:57).[30] Throwing to the wind almost all pretence of legality, they become a mob. They cast Stephen out of the city and stone him to death (cf. 7:58).[31] What happens in the hearts of the members of the Sanhedrin is an anthropological disintegration. The affective trauma to their hearts, caused by the Holy Spirit, of the double truth presented to their intellects, that Jesus is the Messiah and that they have murdered him, leads them volitionally to harden their hearts, that is, wrathfully reject this truth, and murder Stephen.

What is “Conversion of Heart” for Luke?

It has not been possible in this article to give a complete account of the nature of conversion according to Luke. For example, one other fruitful line of enquiry which could be followed is the idea of ongoing conversion. One can see this in the Acts of the Apostles vis-à-vis Peter and the whole church growing in their understanding of who the Gospel should be addressed to and how these addressees are required to respond (cf. Acts 10:1–11:18 & 15:1–31).[32] Another such line is the relationship between conversion and one’s attitude to money (cf. Luke 8:14, 16:13–14, Acts 1:18, 4:36–5:11, & 8:18–24).[33] Rather, its focus has been on how conversion takes place in a particular locus, the heart. What follows is an attempt to sum up its findings.

For Luke, conversion, in the plenary sense, means turning from sin and turning to God. It requires a double revelation from God – a revelation that Jesus is the Christ and that we are sinners against God who can only be saved by believing in his Christ. Accepting this double revelation is not just difficult for us. In our own strength it is impossible. Conversion is not just a call from God, it is a blessing and a gift, from him and from his Christ. Our own hearts are too coarse, slow and doubting to understand this revelation. However, God knows our hearts, opens our hearts to believe the Gospel, and cleanses our hearts through faith. In order for us to understand and believe this revelation, our hearts must be traumatised by the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 2:37 & Jn 16:17–18). They must be pieced to the core. With this piercing comes a true understanding of our situation before God, a conviction of the truth of God’s double revelation to us. From this piercing arises an emotional response to a truth understood which moves us to act, a dismay which cries out for help.[34] Following upon this is a further revelation. In order to be saved we must be baptised into Christ. This will result in the forgiveness of our sins and our reception of the Holy Spirit. The authenticity of our conversion will be demonstrated by the fruits of justice, mercy, forgiveness, and charity that we bear. This also is a gift of the Holy Spirit, who makes us one in heart and life with God and each other.

However, it is possible for us to harden our hearts, to resist the trauma caused by the Holy Spirit. We can be wounded in our hearts, but their hardness can protect them from being pierced to the core. Rather than allowing the Holy Spirit to penetrate them to their utmost depths we can fight off, with an irrational rage, understanding and believing the revelation brought by the Holy Spirit. Rather than receive the Holy Spirit into our hearts, we can open our hearts to Satan. Or we can believe in the reality of our guilty hearts but not in God’s mercy. Or we can believe that Jesus is the Christ but not acknowledge our sinful hearts. Or we can begin by repenting and believing, but subsequently give into the temptation of Satan to fill our hearts to lie to the Holy Spirit.

So, we are left with a choice between two heart-felt responses to the Gospel. Either, “For this people’s heart has thickened, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and they have closed their eyes; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them,” or “Did not our hearts burn within while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the scriptures,” and “Brethren, what shall we do?”

---

[1] Joel B. Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts: Divine Action, Human Cognition, and the People of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015), 1.

[2] For references to this scholarship, see Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 1–4.

[3] Repentance: Lk 3:3; 3:8; 5:32; 15:7; 24:47; Acts 5:31; 11:18; 13:24; 19:4; 20:21; & 26:20. To repent: Lk 10:13; 11:32; 13:3; 13:5; 15:7; 15:10; 16:30; 17:3; 17:4; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 8:22; 17:30; & 26:20.

[4] Luke 1:16; 1:17; 22:32; Acts 3:19; 9:35; 11:21; 14:15; 15:19; & 26:18.

[5] Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 3–4.

[6] Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 4.

[7] See Section E. μετάναεō and μετάνοια in the New Testament, in μετάναεō, μετάνοια, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Vol. IV: 975–1008 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965): 999-1000. Cf. Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 49.

[8] See Georg Bertram, επιστρεφō, επιστροφē, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Vol. VII: 722–29 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1971). Cf. Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 49.

[9] Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 4. On the definition of conversion as a contentious issue in contemporary conversion studies, see Lewis R. Rambo and Charles E. Faradian. “Introduction,” in The Oxford Handbook of Religious Conversion. Edited by Lewis R. Rambo and Charles E. Faradian (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 1–22.

[10] For such an extension, see Beverly Roberts Gaventa, From Darkness to Light: Aspects of Conversion in the New Testament. Overtures to Biblical Theology 20 (Philadelphia; Fortress Press, 1986), 52–92 & 98–125.

[11] For a more detailed exposition of the nature of the heart as presented in Sacred Scripture, see Peter John McGregor, Heart to Heart: The Spiritual Christology of Joseph Ratzinger (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2016), 280–82. See also Jan G. Bovenmars, A Biblical Spirituality of the Heart (New York: Alba House, 1991).

[12] Hugo Rahner, “On the Biblical Basis of the Devotion,” in Heart of the Saviour, edited by Joseph Sterli, 15–35. Translated by Paul Andrews (New York: Herder & Herder, 1957), 17.

[13] For kardia in contradistinction to the mind, cf. 2 Cor 3:14–15; Phil 4:7; Heb 8:10 & 10:16; Rev 2:23. To the soul, cf. 1 Pt 1:22. To the soul and mind, cf. Mt 22:37. To the conscience, cf. 1 Tm 1:5.

[14] For kardia as the locus of the passions, cf. Mt 5:28 & 6:21; Jn 14:1, 14:27, 16:6 & 16:22; Acts 2:26, 7:54, 14:17 & 21:13; Rom 1:24, 9:2 & 10:1; 2 Cor 2:4; Jas 3:14; 2 Pt 2:14. For thought, cf. Mt 9:4 & 24:48; Mk 7:21 & 11:23; Lk 2:35 & 9:47; Rom 10:6; Rev 18:7. For understanding, cf. Mt 13:15 & 24:48; Jn 12:40; Acts 28:27; Rom 1:21; 1 Cor 2:9; Heb 4:12. For doubt and questioning, cf. Mk 11:23; Lk 24:38; Rom 10:6. For deception and belief, cf. Lk 24:25; Heb 3:12; Jas 1:26. For intention and decision, cf. Lk 6:45 & 21:14; Acts 5:3–4, 7:39, 8:22, & 11:23; 1 Cor 4:5, 7:37 & 14:25; 2 Cor 9:7. For imagination and memory, cf. Lk 1:51 & 66, 2:19, & 2:51. For virtue, cf. Lk 8:15; Acts 2:46 & 15:9; Rom 6:17 & 10:9; 2 Thes 3:5. For conscience, cf. 1 Jn 3:20. For purity of heart, cf. Mt 5:8; Acts 15:9; Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; 1 Thes 3:13; 2 Tm 2:22; Heb 10:22. For relation with other human persons, cf. Mt 18:35; Acts 16:14; 2 Cor 6:11–13 & 7:2–3; Phil 1:7.

[15] Hans Urs von Balthasar & Joseph Ratzinger, Mary: The Church at the Source. Translated by Adrian Walker (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 71.

[16] See Joseph Ratzinger, Behold the Pierced One: An Approach to a Spiritual Christology. Translated by Graham Harrison (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), 55–56; and Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration. Translated by Adrian J. Walker (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 92–93. For further analysis of Ratzinger’s understanding of the human heart, see McGregor, Heart to Heart, 58–61, 85–93, 122–23, and 279–310.

[17] For kardia as the locus of which God searches and knows, cf. Lk 16:15; Rom 8:27; 1 Thes 2:4. Of revelation, cf. Lk 24:32; Acts 2:37; Rom 2:15; 2 Cor 3:3 and 4:6; Eph 1:18. Of the refusal of revelation, cf. Mk 3:5; 6:52 & 8:17; Mt 13:19; Jn 12:40; Acts 8:21; Rom 2:5; Eph 4:18. Of God’s indwelling, in Christ, cf. Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17; 2 Pt 1:19.

[18] Ratzinger, Jesus of Nazareth, 92–93.

[19] For Christians being filled with the Holy Spirit, cf. Acts 2:4, 6:3, 7:55, 9:17, 11:24, 13:9, & 13:52. For Christians as the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit, cf. Rom 8:9; 1 Cor 3:16 & 6:19; Eph 2:22; 2 Tm 1:14. For the Holy Spirit enlightening and renewing the minds of Christians, cf. Rom 8:5–6; 1 Cor 2:13; Eph 4:23. For the Holy Spirit inspiring peace and joy in Christians, cf. Rom 12:11 & 14:17; 1 Thes 1:6.

[20] Luke 1:16, 1:17, 22:32, Acts 3:19, 9:35, 9:42, 11:21, 14:15, 15:3, 15:19, 26:18, 26:20, & 28:27.

[21] In Mark, Jesus defines this re-orientation with the command to “repent [metanoîete] and believe in the Gospel” (Mk 1:15).

[22] Luke also records people believing in the Lord at Acts 4:4 & 5:14.

[23] For example, see Gaventa, From Darkness to Light, 89.

[24] Green characterises Judas’ action, as described in Acts 1:25, as a kind of anti-conversion, a “turning aside (parabe) to go to his own place”. See Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 148.

[25] Given that Mark’s Gospel is about 60% the length of Luke’s Gospel, proportionally, Mark’s use of kardia is slightly more frequent than Luke’s in his Gospel. Interestingly, of the thirteen references to kardia in Mark, five speak of hardness of heart or hardheartedness (cf. 3:5; 6:52; 8:17; 10:5; & 16:14). In comparison, Matthew speaks of hardheartedness only once (cf. 19:8), John also once (cf. 12:40), but Luke never. Moreover, in Matthew, only Jesus speaks of the heart, whereas in Mark, Jesus uses the term eight times and the narrator five. Although beyond the scope of this article, it could be fruitful to compare the Lukan and Pauline uses of the term kardia, which is very common for Paul. 

[26] Proposing a link between turning from false gods to the true God and the reference to the heart, spoken of in Acts 14:15–17, may seem tendentious with regard to my argument. However, God’s satisfying the hearts of the Gentiles with the food and gladness which comes from the natural gifts of rains and fruitful seasons is called a witness, and as such can be regarded as a precursor to the good news of supernatural gifts – forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit.

[27] This phrase is drawn from Malachi 4:5–6, and refers to the ministry of Elijah before the Day of the Lord.

[28] Gaventa does not regard Luke 2:37–38 as being a paradigmatic account of conversion: “At first glance, it seems reasonable to regard v. 38 as Luke’s statement of the pattern of conversion. One who is “cut to the heart” (v. 37) repents, is baptized, receives forgiveness of sins, and then receives the Holy Spirit. The difficulty with this assessment of 2:38 . . . is that it forces one pattern on all the texts. Nowhere else in Acts does this pattern of conversion appear. When Luke refers to groups of converts, he says simply that many believed (4:4; 5:14; 9:42) or many turned to the Lord (9:35). None of the three lengthy stories of individual converts conforms to this pattern, as we shall see.” From Darkness to Light, 97. However, this is the logical fallacy called argumentum ex silentio, an argument from silence. The fact that Luke does not mention every one of these elements of conversion in every account of conversion does not mean that they did not take place. All of these elements of conversion are found, in part, elsewhere in Luke and Acts. Luke does not give a full account of repentance and conversion in every account of conversion – that would be tedious. He often uses a single term, which is an aspect of the process, to name the whole process. When Paul summarises his ministry to Herod Agrippa, he specifically states that, from Damascus onward, he preached repentance, turning to God, and deeds worthy of repentance to both Jew and Gentile.

[29] Henry George Liddell & Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 409.

[30] The term homothymadon is found eleven times in the New Testament, ten of which are in Acts. With regard to Christians it expresses their koinonia. As well as being translated as “of one accord” it is also translated as “with or of one mind”. However, this translation does not capture the full meaning of the term. Its root, thymos, is derived from the term to “rush along,” and the meaning of the root is to express an outburst of passion, especially wrath. In the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, homothymadon is defined as “with one mind” and “with one emotion”. In the Theological Lexicon of the New Testament it is translated as “same soul” or “same heart,” indicating not just an intellectual unanimity but also an emotional harmony. In other words, it could also be translated as “with or of one heart”. See Hans Wolfgang Heidland, ὁμοθυμαδόν, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Vol. V: 185–86 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1967); and ὁμοθυμαδόν, ὁμόφρων, in Ceslas Spicq O.P., Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, translated and edited by James D. Ernest, Vol. 2: 580–82 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994).

[31] The phrase “they cast him out of the city” (ekbalontes exo tes poleos) is a repetition of Luke 4:29 (exebalon auton exo tes poleos), where the citizens of Nazareth, who were all filled with wrath (eplesthesan pantes thumou) intended to kill Jesus.

[32] Cf. Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 154.

[33] Cf. Green, Conversion in Luke-Acts, 147–59. With great insight, Green says, “It is not too much to say that, for Luke, the disposition of one’s wealth is the public face of the disposition of one’s heart (158).”

[34] Cf. Ratzinger, Jesus of Nazareth, 92–93: “His will must be pure and so too must the underlying affective dimension of his soul, which gives intelligence and will their direction.”

---

Peter John McGregor is a lecturer in dogmatic theology and spirituality at the Catholic Institute of Sydney, Australia.

This is a reprint with permission of: Peter John McGregor “Conversion of Heart according to Luke,” Journal of Gospel and Acts Research 3 (2019): 56-68.