Luke’s two-volume work presents Jesus’ ministry and the apostles’ ministry as a continuous story of God’s power—yet not as a photocopy. This study applies a mode taxonomy similar to Gospel miracle analysis (spoken word, touch, distance, garment/shadow/cloth, name of Jesus, material means, and mixed forms) to the major miracle accounts in Acts, then compares them with Jesus’ Gospel miracles to map continuity and difference.
Readers sometimes claim the apostles simply “did what Jesus did.” Others claim apostolic miracles are so different that continuity is thin. Acts itself suggests a richer option: the risen Jesus continues to act, the Spirit empowers witnesses, and the name of Jesus becomes a public mode of authority that was not the apostles’ slogan during the Galilean ministry in the same way.
This article catalogs representative Acts miracles, codes their performance modes, and sets them beside Gospel patterns (including the commonly studied 37-miracle set). The aim is research clarity for Bible students, not a contest about who had “more power.”
Important: Acts includes both discrete miracle narratives and summary statements (“many signs and wonders”). This study codes distinct narrative episodes as primary data and treats summaries as supporting context. Counts therefore describe the coded sample, not every healing implied by Luke’s summaries.
Why Compare Acts and Gospel Miracle Modes?
Comparison helps in three ways.
First, it tests continuity claims with evidence. If Jesus often healed by touch and word, do Peter and Paul do likewise? If Jesus sometimes healed at a distance, does Acts?
Second, it highlights what is new after Easter and Pentecost: prayer in Jesus’ name, Spirit-filled boldness, handkerchiefs and shadows, and miracles tied to mission breakthroughs among Jews and Gentiles.
Third, it guards doctrine and practice. Continuity without difference can turn apostles into second Jesuses. Difference without continuity can sever the church from Jesus’ compassionate authority.
References:
- Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1–8 — Luke’s unified project and Spirit-power premise
- John 14:12–14 — Johannine promise regarding works and the name (canonical conversation partner)
- Companion study: “The 37 Miracles of Jesus: A Pattern Analysis of How Each Miracle Was Performed”
Method: Mode Taxonomy for Acts
Each Acts episode receives a primary mode and, when needed, a secondary mode.
Mode categories
- Spoken command / word — healing or deliverance primarily by authoritative speech.
- Touch / right hand / raising up — physical contact central.
- Name of Jesus — explicit invocation or command “in the name of Jesus Christ.”
- Distance word — effect occurs apart from the speaker’s immediate touch (rarer in Acts narratives).
- Shadow / cloth / handkerchief / apron — mediated contact through shadow or objects.
- Prayer + action — prayer explicitly precedes or frames the miracle.
- Material means — tangible actions (for example, Paul’s laying on of hands with noted physical detail; unusual cases).
- Judgment sign — miraculous penalty (Ananias & Sapphira; Elymas blinded; Herod’s death).
- Liberation / nature-rescue — prisons, earthquakes, snake, shipwreck preservation.
- Mixed — two modes inseparable in the narration.
Additional coding tags
- Agent — Peter, John, Paul, Stephen (signs noted), Philip, Ananias of Damascus, etc.
- Type — healing, deliverance, resurrection, judgment, liberation, provision-like, mass summary.
- Christological note — does the text credit Jesus/Spirit explicitly?
- Gospel analogue — closest Jesus-miracle pattern, if any.
Example 1: Simple Acts coding
Scenario: Peter heals the lame man at the Beautiful Gate (Acts 3:1–10).
Primary mode: Mixed (name of Jesus + right-hand touch + command to walk) Type: Healing Christological note: Explicit — “in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth” Gospel analogue: Lame/paralytic healings by word/touch (e.g., Mark 2; John 5 patterns differ in initiation)
Example 2: Distinctively Acts coding
Scenario: People hope Peter’s shadow will fall on them (Acts 5:15–16).
Primary mode: Shadow mediation (crowd expectation + reported healings) Type: Mass healing context Christological note: Signs among the people under apostolic presence Gospel analogue: Fringe-of-garment healings (Mark 6:56) — mediated contact continuity with difference
References:
- Acts 3:1–10; 5:12–16
- Mark 6:56; Matthew 14:36 — garment-fringe healings as Gospel analogues
Catalog of Major Acts Miracle Episodes
The table below is the working dataset for comparison.
| # | Episode | Primary Mode | Type | Key Texts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pentecost signs (sound, fire, tongues) | Spirit initiation / word empowerment | Sign / proclamation | Acts 2:1–13 |
| 2 | Lame man at Beautiful Gate | Name of Jesus + touch + command | Healing | Acts 3:1–10 |
| 3 | Ananias and Sapphira | Prophetic word / judgment sign | Judgment | Acts 5:1–11 |
| 4 | Many healed; Peter’s shadow | Shadow / apostolic presence | Mass healing | Acts 5:12–16 |
| 5 | Prison doors opened for apostles | Angel liberation | Liberation | Acts 5:17–21 |
| 6 | Stephen’s wonders (summary) + vision | Spirit power / vision | Signs + revelation | Acts 6:8; 7:55–56 |
| 7 | Philip in Samaria (signs, deliverances) | Mixed word/signs | Healing / deliverance | Acts 8:5–8 |
| 8 | Philip and the Ethiopian (guidance) | Spirit direction (mission sign) | Guidance | Acts 8:26–40 |
| 9 | Saul’s blindness and healing via Ananias | Judgment then touch/hands + named Lord | Judgment / healing | Acts 9:1–19 |
| 10 | Aeneas healed at Lydda | Name/word (“Jesus Christ heals you”) | Healing | Acts 9:32–35 |
| 11 | Tabitha / Dorcas raised | Prayer + spoken command / gesture | Resurrection | Acts 9:36–42 |
| 12 | Peter freed by angel from Herod’s prison | Angel liberation | Liberation | Acts 12:1–11 |
| 13 | Herod struck down | Angel judgment | Judgment | Acts 12:20–23 |
| 14 | Elymas blinded | Spoken judgment (Paul) | Judgment | Acts 13:6–12 |
| 15 | Lame man at Lystra | Spoken command (loud voice) | Healing | Acts 14:8–10 |
| 16 | Paul left for dead, rises | Disciple recovery / presence | Rescue / healing | Acts 14:19–20 |
| 17 | Slave girl delivered at Philippi | Name of Jesus command | Deliverance | Acts 16:16–18 |
| 18 | Earthquake prison liberation | Nature-rescue / divine intervention | Liberation | Acts 16:25–34 |
| 19 | Handkerchiefs/aprons from Paul | Cloth mediation | Healing / deliverance | Acts 19:11–12 |
| 20 | Sons of Sceva failure | Name misuse contrast | Anti-miracle lesson | Acts 19:13–17 |
| 21 | Eutychus raised at Troas | Embrace / life-return (Paul) | Resurrection | Acts 20:7–12 |
| 22 | Paul unharmed by viper | Nature preservation | Protection sign | Acts 28:3–6 |
| 23 | Father of Publius healed; others | Prayer + laying on of hands | Healing | Acts 28:7–9 |
Summaries such as Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 8:7; 14:3; 19:11 expand the field beyond these episodes and should be read alongside the table.
References:
- Acts 2–28 miracle and sign narratives listed above
- Luke Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles (Sacra Pagina) — literary reading of signs
Mode Frequencies in the Acts Sample
Distinct episodes coded: 23 (plus summaries as context) Prominent mode signals in sample: – Name of Jesus / Christological speech: frequent in healings & deliverance (3; 9:34; 16:18) – Touch / hands: common (3; 9:17; 28:8; Tabitha/Eutychus gestures) – Spoken command alone: present (14:8–10; judgment words) – Shadow / cloth mediation: distinctive cluster (5:15; 19:11–12) – Angelic liberation/judgment: major Acts thread (5; 12) – Prayer framing: explicit in raisings and Malta healings – Judgment signs: more narratively prominent than in the Gospel 37-miracle healing list
Study finding: Acts continues Gospel modes (word, touch, prayer, compassion healings) while intensifying two features: (1) explicit action in Jesus’ name, and (2) mediated contact (shadow/cloth) plus angelic jailbreaks and judgment signs tied to mission conflict.
Continuity with Jesus’ Gospel Miracles
Continuity 1: Authority of the spoken word
Jesus commands clean, rise, come out, be still. In Acts, Peter says “walk,” Paul says “stand upright,” and unclean spirits are ordered out. The grammar of authority remains speech that expects reality to obey.
Continuity 2: Touch that restores dignity
Jesus touches lepers, hands, and bier. Acts shows hands extended: Peter raises the lame man; Ananias lays hands on Saul; Paul lays hands on Publius’s father; raisings involve close bodily presence. Touch remains pastoral, not theatrical for its own sake.
Continuity 3: Deliverance from spiritual oppression
Gospel exorcisms find a clear echo in Philippi (Acts 16) and in Samaria summaries (Acts 8:7). Authority confronts exploitation and torment.
Continuity 4: Raising the dead as rare, identity-shaping signs
Jesus raises a few. Acts narrates Tabitha and Eutychus (and reports of the miraculous around apostolic crises). These remain uncommon and evangelistically consequential.
Continuity 5: Compassion for the publicly disabled
Beautiful Gate and Lystra stories resemble Gospel attention to those at thresholds and margins—people seen by crowds and often overlooked by systems.
Example 1: Continuous word-and-touch healing
Scenario: Acts 3 compared with Gospel paralytic/lame healings.
Jesus pattern: Word + sometimes touch; faith contexts vary Acts 3: Word + right hand + name of Jesus Continuity: Restorative mobility miracle in public religious space Difference: Name formula and post-Easter sermon interpretation (Acts 3–4)
Example 2: Continuous raising pattern
Scenario: Tabitha (Acts 9) beside Jairus’s daughter / upper-room privacy motifs.
Shared: Death scene; apostolic/Jesus presence; restoration to community Acts note: Peter kneels and prays first — prayer stage more explicit than some Gospel raisings Outcome: Widows consoled; many believe in Joppa
References:
- Mark 1–2; 5; Luke 7; John 11 — Gospel healing/raising patterns
- Acts 3; 9:36–42; 16:16–18; 20:7–12
Differences from Jesus’ Gospel Miracles
Difference 1: The name of Jesus as public mode
In the Gospels, Jesus acts in His own authority. In Acts, apostles explicitly heal and deliver in His name. The Sons of Sceva episode proves the name is not a magic password detachable from allegiance (Acts 19:13–17).
Difference 2: Shadow and cloth mediation become prominent
Gospel fringe-touch stories anticipate mediated contact, but Acts heightens the pattern with Peter’s shadow and Paul’s handkerchiefs. Luke presents these as extraordinary (Acts 19:11: “God was doing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul”).
Difference 3: Judgment signs occupy more narrative spotlight
Jesus’ ministry includes punitive elements (fig tree; warnings), but Acts narrates community judgment (Ananias & Sapphira), prophetic blinding (Elymas), and tyrant death (Herod) as integral mission history.
Difference 4: Angelic liberations from prison
Gospel nature miracles include storms and fish; Acts repeatedly features jailbreaks as salvation-historical necessities for witness. Liberation miracles serve the Word’s progress.
Difference 5: Agents are plural and mission-routed
Jesus is the unique center. Acts distributes signs through Peter, Stephen, Philip, Ananias, and Paul as the gospel crosses geographic and ethnic borders. Miracles track Acts 1:8 expansion.
Difference 6: Distance healings are less thematic as a set
The Gospels feature memorable distance healings (centurion’s servant; official’s son; Canaanite daughter). Acts emphasizes presence, name, hands, and objects more than long-range spoken healings as a major subtype—though God’s action is never locally trapped.
Example 1: Name without relationship fails
Scenario: Sons of Sceva try to use Jesus’ name as technique (Acts 19:13–16).
Mode attempted: Name invocation Result: Beating and exposure Difference from apostles: No authentic allegiance/authority Lesson: Continuity is Christological, not formulaic
Example 2: Cloth mediation as extraordinary
Scenario: Acts 19:11–12.
Mode: Handkerchiefs and aprons Gospel analogue: Garment fringe Acts emphasis: “Extraordinary” — not routine technique for all churches Pastoral caution: Descriptive narrative ≠ universal method prescription
Study finding: The center of continuity is Jesus’ ongoing authority; the center of difference is ecclesial witness mode—name, Spirit, apostles/missionaries, and signs tethered to the Word’s advance among nations.
References:
- Acts 5:1–11; 12:1–23; 13:6–12; 19:11–17
- F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts (NICNT)
Continuity/Difference Findings Table
| Dimension | Jesus (Gospels) | Apostles (Acts) | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spoken command | Very frequent | Frequent | Strong continuity |
| Touch / hands | Frequent, dignity-restoring | Frequent | Strong continuity |
| Distance word healings | Clear subtype | Less emphasized as subtype | Partial continuity / shift |
| Garment / mediated contact | Fringe stories | Shadow + cloth heightened | Continuity with escalation |
| Use of “name of Jesus” | Jesus acts as Himself | Central apostolic mode | Major difference (post-Easter) |
| Deliverance | Core ministry | Continues in mission settings | Strong continuity |
| Raising dead | Rare, weighty | Rare, weighty | Strong continuity |
| Nature / provision | Storms, food, fish | Earthquake jailbreak; viper; voyages | Related but retargeted |
| Judgment signs | Present but not the main healing catalog | Narratively prominent | Difference in emphasis |
| Angel jailbreaks | Not a major Jesus-miracle type | Repeated | Distinctive Acts feature |
| Goal of signs | Reveal Jesus’ identity/kingdom | Confirm Word; expand witness | Continuous purpose, new stage |
| Source of power | Jesus’ person | Risen Jesus / Spirit through witnesses | Theological continuity |
This table is the study’s comparative spine. It allows teachers to affirm “Acts looks like Jesus” without pretending Acts is only a rerun.
Invitation Pathways: Continuity with a Mission Twist
Gospel invitation pathways (direct request, intercession, Jesus initiates, crisis) still appear. In Acts:
- Direct encounter — lame man asks for alms, receives healing (Acts 3).
- Community grief — widows show Tabitha’s garments; Peter is summoned (Acts 9).
- Opposition crisis — prison and persecution become stages for liberation signs.
- Mission initiative — Paul sees faith in the Lystra man and speaks (Acts 14:9–10), reminiscent of Jesus noticing faith—yet within Gentile evangelism drama.
Example 1: Seen faith at Lystra
Scenario: Acts 14:8–10.
Invitation pathway: Paul perceives faith to be healed Mode: Loud spoken command Gospel echo: Jesus seeing faith (Mark 2) / responding to trust Acts frame: Crowd then misreads miracle as pagan divine visit — continuity of power, difference in cultural reception
Example 2: Prayer before raising
Scenario: Acts 9:40 — Peter kneels and prays, then turns to the body.
Mode: Prayer + command Difference of emphasis: Explicit dependence before speech Continuity: Dead restored; community impact
References:
- Acts 3:1–10; 9:36–42; 14:8–18
- Mark 2:1–12 — friends’ faith and Jesus’ word
Theological Pattern: Who Is Really Acting?
Acts repeatedly answers the continuity question theologically. Peter denies personal power: “Why do you stare at us, as though by our own power or piety we have made him walk?” (Acts 3:12). Healing is by faith in Jesus’ name (3:16). Extraordinary miracles are what “God was doing” (19:11). Continuity is not apostolic self-extension; it is Jesus’ ongoing reign through the Spirit.
Study finding: Mode analysis without Christology misreads Acts. The most important continuity is not technique match-percentage; it is the same Lord continuing to heal, judge, free, and advance the word.
A Walkthrough Method for Any Acts Sign
- Identify the agent and the beneficiaries.
- Code the mode (word, touch, name, shadow/cloth, prayer, angel, judgment, mixed).
- Name the type (healing, deliverance, raising, liberation, judgment).
- Ask what is credited to Jesus/Spirit.
- Find the nearest Gospel analogue without forcing it.
- Note the mission effect (sermon, conversions, opposition, geographic advance).
- Separate description from prescription for church practice.
Example 1: Method on Acts 16 deliverance
Scenario: Slave girl with python spirit.
1. Agent: Paul; beneficiary: exploited girl 2. Mode: Command in name of Jesus Christ 3. Type: Deliverance 4. Credit: Jesus’ name 5. Gospel analogue: Exorcism commands 6. Mission effect: Economic backlash; beating; jail; conversion of jailer 7. Practice note: Deliverance tied to gospel conflict, not show business
Example 2: Method on Malta
Scenario: Acts 28:7–9.
1. Agent: Paul 2. Mode: Prayer + laying on of hands 3. Type: Healing (then others come) 4. Credit: Implied divine mercy in mission hospitality setting 5. Gospel analogue: Touch healings; hospitality houses 6. Mission effect: Favor for shipwrecked witness 7. Practice note: Prayerful hands remain ordinary-looking continuity
Important: Acts 19’s “extraordinary” cloth miracles sit beside Acts 19’s warning against name-magic. Any ministry that copies objects but ignores repentance, allegiance, and the Word reverses Luke’s emphasis.
Side-by-Side Episode Comparisons
Abstract continuity claims sharpen when specific pairs are examined.
Pair 1: Jesus heals a paralytic / Peter heals the lame man
| Feature | Gospel (e.g., Mark 2) | Acts 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Setting | Crowded house / teaching scene | Temple gate / prayer hour |
| Mode | Word of forgiveness and rising | Name of Jesus + hand + “walk” |
| Faith note | Friends’ faith highlighted | Faith in Jesus’ name explained in sermon |
| Aftermath | Controversy with scribes | Arrest and proclamation opportunity |
| Verdict | Continuity of restorative authority; difference in named mediation and post-Easter preaching | |
Pair 2: Jesus’ garment fringe / Peter’s shadow and Paul’s cloths
All three involve mediated contact. The Gospel stories center on touching Jesus Himself. Acts extends mediation through apostolic presence and objects, while still attributing the work to God. Continuity of “contact beyond bare hands” meets difference of agent and intensity markers (“extraordinary”).
Pair 3: Jesus stills a storm / Acts earthquake jailbreak
Both are nature interventions. Jesus rebukes wind and sea in the disciples’ crisis. Acts’ earthquake opens prison doors during hymn-prayer witness and leads to a household conversion. Continuity: creation serves the Lord. Difference: Acts retargets nature power toward mission liberation and evangelistic aftermath.
Example 1: Pair teaching in a class
Scenario: Students receive two columns and must mark C (continuous), D (different), or B (both) for ten features across Pair 1.
Likely B marks: public disability; authoritative speech; controversy aftermath Likely D marks: “in the name of Jesus”; sermon interpretation in temple courts Learning goal: Precision over slogans
Example 2: Pair warning from Acts 19
Scenario: Compare Jesus’ authority over demons with Sons of Sceva.
Jesus: Personal authority Apostles: Derivative authority in Jesus’ name Sceva’s sons: Verbal copy without allegiance Finding: Formal similarity can hide spiritual discontinuity
References:
- Mark 2:1–12; Acts 3:1–26
- Mark 5:25–34; 6:56; Acts 5:15–16; 19:11–12
- Mark 4:35–41; Acts 16:25–34
What Luke Wants Readers to Notice
Luke is not writing a technique manual. He is writing ordered history so that readers know the certainty of what they have been taught (Luke 1:4) and see the Word run (Acts’ plot). Signs authenticate and illustrate; they do not replace repentance, baptism, teaching, and fellowship.
Three Lukan emphases should control comparative enthusiasm:
- Promise and fulfillment: Jesus promises power from on high; Acts shows it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8; 2).
- Witness under pressure: Signs often appear where testimony is costly.
- Universal horizon: Miracles accompany the gospel’s movement across languages, cities, and cultures.
Study finding: If a comparative study of modes never mentions witness, Spirit, and the nations, it has measured the fingers and missed the pointing hand.
Example 1: Pentecost as paradigm shift
Scenario: Acts 2 signs (sound, fire appearance, tongues) do not clone a single Gospel healing mode.
Function: Empower proclamation across nations Continuity: God acts powerfully for salvation history Difference: New-covenant Spirit outpouring as mission ignition Comparative note: Not every Acts “miracle” maps onto the 37 healings list — categories must widen
Example 2: Healing that produces a sermon
Scenario: Acts 3 healing is inseparable from Acts 3–4 preaching about the glorified Servant.
Mode analysis alone: name + touch Full Lukan analysis: sign → sermon → salvation offer → opposition Method rule: Always read the speech after the sign when Luke provides one
Important: Modern ministries sometimes isolate Acts modes (cloths, shadows, formulas) from Acts messages (repentance, risen Christ, generosity, holiness). Luke never authorizes that divorce.
References:
- Luke 24:44–49; Acts 1:1–8; 2:1–41; 3:11–26; 4:23–31
Common Questions
Did the apostles do “greater works”? John 14 language is theologically rich and debated in scope. Acts shows expansive geographic and Gentile effects, always derivative of Jesus.
Why include judgment miracles in a healing comparison? Because mode taxonomy must include what Acts actually narrates as mighty acts. Omitting them skews continuity findings toward only soft parallels.
Are shadow and cloth healings normative templates? Luke marks at least Paul’s case as extraordinary. Narratives authorize faith in Jesus, not guaranteed techniques.
Where is Jesus in Acts miracles if He has ascended? Acts 1–2 answers: exalted Lord and poured-out Spirit. Peter’s sermons interpret signs as Jesus’ ongoing work.
How does this relate to the 37 Gospel miracles study? Use the same habit—transparent coding—then add Acts-specific modes (name, shadow/cloth, angelic liberation, judgment signs) and compare with the findings table above.
Implications for Faithful Reading Today
First, expect continuity of compassion and authority without demanding identical choreography.
Second, keep Jesus’ name central as allegiance, not as incantation.
Third, read signs as servants of the Word’s advance, matching Acts’ own plot.
Fourth, hold together mercy healings and holy judgment texts; Acts refuses a tame God.
Fifth, study with tables and open Bibles. Pattern comparison is for clarity, not for spiritual competitiveness.
Sixth, let Acts summaries humble your statistics. “Many signs and wonders” means any episode catalog is a sample of a larger field of divine action.
Seventh, keep holiness beside power. Ananias and Sapphira stand near shadow healings for a reason: the same God who restores legs also confronts deceit in the church.
Expanded Continuity Scorecard
For teachers who want a quick visual, the scorecard below restates the findings table as classroom language.
| Claim people make | Evidence check | Better claim |
|---|---|---|
| “Apostles copied Jesus’ methods exactly.” | Partial — word/touch/deliverance yes; name/shadow/jailbreaks shift the profile | Apostles acted under Jesus’ authority with overlapping and new modes |
| “Acts miracles are totally different.” | False — too many Gospel analogues | Acts is continuous with distinctive post-Easter features |
| “Cloths and shadows are the main pattern.” | Overstated — present but marked extraordinary / situational | Mediated contact is a real subtype, not the whole catalog |
| “Judgment signs aren’t miracles.” | Category dodge | They are mighty acts and belong in mode analysis |
| “Technique unlocks power.” | Contradicted by Acts 19:13–17 | Allegiance to Jesus and the Spirit’s work unlock witness |
Example 1: Small-group debate format
Scenario: Two teams argue continuity vs difference for twenty minutes using only Acts 3, 5, 9, 16, and 19.
Required: Each team cites modes and Gospel analogues Moderator rule: No claim without a text Closing: Build one shared findings sentence
Example 2: Personal study notebook
Scenario: Over two weeks, code ten Acts episodes with the seven-step method and mark C/D/B against Gospel memory.
Week 1: Healings and raisings Week 2: Deliverance, liberation, judgment Final page: Your own continuity/difference table Compare: This article’s scorecard
Conclusion
When Acts miracles are coded with a mode taxonomy akin to Gospel analysis, continuity and difference both stand out clearly. Continuity appears in spoken authority, restorative touch, deliverance, rare raisings, and compassion for the marginalized. Difference appears in the public use of Jesus’ name, heightened mediated contact, angelic liberations, judgment signs, and plural agents carrying the mission outward.
The strongest overall pattern is theological: the miracles of Acts are not a rival brand to Jesus’ miracles. They are the next chapter of the same Lord’s power, redirected through witnesses for the sake of the gospel’s path from Jerusalem to the nations.
Mode taxonomy makes that claim testable. Where word and touch recur, continuity is visible. Where the name of Jesus, shadows, cloths, jailbreaks, and judgment signs intensify, difference is also visible. Honest Bible study holds both without slogans, and it lets Luke’s Christology—not ministry fashion—decide what counts as faithful imitation.
Continue the research by coding five Acts episodes and five Gospel episodes side by side with the findings table. Where your verdicts differ, return to Luke’s wording about who is acting. That habit keeps comparative miracle study accountable, original, and useful to congregations that want power without superstition and continuity without erasing Pentecost.
Taken together, the Acts catalog and the Gospel comparison support a simple research conclusion: the risen Jesus remains the actor; the apostles remain witnesses; the modes overlap enough to prove continuity and diverge enough to mark a new mission chapter.
Complete reference list:
- The Holy Bible: Gospel miracle traditions in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John; Acts 1–28 sign narratives
- Acts 1:1–8; 3:11–16; 19:11–17 — programmatic and interpretive keys
- F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts (NICNT)
- Luke Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles (Sacra Pagina)
- Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (signs and historical context)
- Companion article on the 37 miracles of Jesus (mode/invitation pattern analysis)
Disclaimer: Miracle catalogs in Acts vary depending on whether summaries are counted as separate events. Mode labels are research categories for comparison, not claims that God’s action is limited to these techniques.