The main issues .

In the first place, have you already read the various scripture that I have used?

All three indicated a future forgiveness of Israel sins

Acts picks up where the end of Luke leaves off: on the mount of Olives, near Bethany, where Jesus ascended from.

Some of the people from the places listed below are from gentile locations.

Acts 2:9-11
9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

Acts 2:14
14But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

Acts 2:21
21And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

You do realize that the rest of this chapter that both Jewish and gentile people are present and Peter proceeds to preach the gospel to them, right?

Acts 2:41
41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Three thousand souls were saved. I'm going to have to utterly dismiss your claim that Acts is useless for doctrine.

Thanks, never noticed the issue before. Hope that solved it.

Nope. Peter and the diciples are shocked at the conversion of Cornelius
Acts 10 ( 10 years after acts 2 )

28And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

. Acts 11
15And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

16Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

18¶When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

19¶Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
So I don't agree with you that Acts is best for doctrine .

When someone comes along and claims that Acts is useless for doctrine, that person is either (a) not very well-versed in the Scriptures, (b) has been influenced by Hyper-Dispensationalists, or (c) is just plain ignorant (in the literal sense).

The Acts of the Apostles (read the Acts of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles) is one of the key books in the Bible (along with Romans). It is packed with Gospel truth and Bible truth. And since it is included in "all Scripture" (2 Tim 3:16) it is imperative that every Christian learn the "wonderful works of God" found in that book.

The impact of the apostles and the Holy Spirit on the Roman empire (and beyond) cannot possibly be grasped by the very succinct way in which all Scripture is written (generally without superlatives). God is very sparing with His words, as the apostle John already told us. So we need to dig beneath the surface and search out the things which are implied in Scripture, rather than demanding that everything should be explicitly stated (otherwise we will not believe).

When did I say ' useless ' ? I said it gets ' USED for 'doctrines . Its useful for the same reasons all scripture is ,in the right context, rightly dividing. Its you that believes a message given in the second chapter in a book of 28 chapter s , is the plan of salvation today. Thus teaching baptism is necessary to receive the baptism of the Holy spirit ,today. And yes I'm aware of all the tap dancing that has to happen to verse 38 to make it match Paul's letters on salvation .

You say //
The Acts of the Apostles (read the Acts of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles) is one of the key books in the Bible
/// Yes we read of the Acts of the apostles and how God is transitioning from the OT , from the law and from Jews to Gentiles ( and you land on only the second chapter in a boom of 28 in the transitions, right at the beginning and call that the plan for today )


// (along with Romans)// Yes this is what the majority of Denominations have done . They read Romans back into Acts as if that was there all a long . Instead of reading from the apostle to the gentiles doctrines which have now been settled and solidified . Read Acts 15 to see they needed a council to explain the transition.

///. It is packed with Gospel truth//

Good news truth about how God was revealing his transitions through Jews ,to samaratians to Gentiles finally ( 10 years later after the verse you think is the plan today )

// and Bible truth// Yes all scripture is from God .
. And since it is included in "all Scripture" (2 Tim 3:16) it is imperative that every Christian learn the "wonderful works of God" found in that book.//// Agreed ,in the context it was given to
1¶The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,

2Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

3To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

//
The impact of the apostles and the Holy Spirit on the Roman empire (and beyond) cannot possibly be grasped by the very succinct way in which all Scripture is written (generally without superlatives). God is very sparing with His words, as the apostle John already told us. So we need to dig beneath the surface and search out the things which are implied in Scripture, rather than demanding that everything should be explicitly stated (otherwise we will not believe).

// Yes but to miss the whole context of the book of Acts ,which is self evident , is the cause of all this false teaching we have today . From baptismal regeneration , snake handling churches, foot washers , abuse of ' gifts ', teaching only past sins were forgiven , conditional salvation, 'second blessing ' , the tongues movement, crazy revivals , benny hinn , Oral Roberts, Smith Wigglesworth, bethel movement, Lordship salvation, 'initial evidence ' ,
ect . All the cults use Acts to support their similar ideas on baptism being necessary for salvation and how they are the only true authentic church just like Acts ,laying on of hands to " impart ' ( Mormons) ect . I don't know a single wacky denomination that hasn't taken the book of Acts ( especially 2.38 ) out of context. Some literally choose all the 29 different conversion accounts and claim them all for today . All packaged to suit . Every cult uses Acts to support their doctrines. And they all overlook the most obvious nature of the book . That its not meant to be taken prescriptive . Its clearly descriptive .

The apostles reached many ' locations ' The key word is 'locations ' . Many from different locations, Jews and proselytes had gathered from many different 'locations ' to be there at pentacost. No Jewish disiple until Corneluis ( Of course Philip reaches a samaritain ) is going to gentiles. Different locations yes, gentile locations ,but not gentiles.

In the beginning of acts, the kingdom of heaven was still at hand and the early believers lived in expectation that the kingdom was coming at any time. They sold all their possessions and distributed as people had need. When the Jews rejected their Messiah once more and the kingdom postponed, God would turn to the gentile world to build his church. Acts is a transition book showing us how God turned from the Jews and the kingdom, to the Gentiles and his church, from Peter to Paul, from Jerusalem to Antioch.

One thing to note is that initially, Acts 4:34 indicated "there were no needy persons among them", but by the time Acts 11 came in, after Stephen was stoned, prophet Agabus in Acts 11:28 "a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world", that made Paul determined that the gentile churches should contribute money to help the Jerusalem HQ, he wrote about this fund raising effort in various letters such as (1 Cor 16:1–4; 2 Cor 8:1–9:15; Gal 2:10; Rom 15:25–31)

That is a clear indication of the transition.

I have always wondered whether James and the elders accepted the money in the end because the Acts 21:18-25 account made zero mention of it. Or did Paul had to divert the money to pay for the shaving head ceremony of the zealous Jews?

It was in Jerusalem where Peter was preaching to Jews in Gentiles. There was a crowd of diverse people.

Acts 1:12

12Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.


Acts 2:5
5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Furthermore, Philip preaches to a gentile from Ethiopia who comes to believe in Jesus in Acts 8.

Acts 8:27
27And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship

Acts 8:37
37And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God

It was in Jerusalem where Peter was preaching to Jews and Gentiles. There was a crowd of diverse people.

Acts 1:12

12Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.


Acts 2:5
5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Furthermore, Philip preaches to a gentile from Ethiopia who comes to believe in Jesus in Acts 8.

Acts 8:27
27And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship

Acts 8:37
37And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God


Right off the starting line in Acts they go straight to Jewish and gentile people with the gospel. Your narrative that it's a transitional book

Post #1
Here are just some of the main errors ,I believe :
4) The book of Acts used for doctrines

3000 Jews and proselytes.

Yes that's it a Gentile coming to worship at Jerusalem reading Isaiah, as all unconverted Gentiles usually did . Not . And where does it say he was a gentile?

“Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem” (vs. 14). The discourse is Jewish , no Christians are present in the group. The word “dwell” this time refers to Jews of the dispersion who came to the feast, which is evident by verse 5 (“And there were DWELLING at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of EVERY NATION under heaven”)

Where does it say ' gentiles ' ?

Acts 2:5
5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, OUT OF every nation under heaven.

Why then are Peter and disciples surprised by the conversion of Gentiles in Acts 10,11 then ? Peter saying its not lawful to go to gentiles . Why does God need to give Peter the vision three times from heaven before Peter can understand now God is granting the Gentiles can be reached now and receive the Holy Spirit if really Non Jews / proselytes have been reached all along ? Why say this in Acts 11 ?
19¶Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the JEWS ONLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did i add ' useless ' anywhere? USED for doctrines yes . Then I state some of those.