I will go ahead and forewarn you that I open a few can of worms in this post. I couldn't help it. But, in response, I would love to hear your feedback, comments and thoughts to the theological questions I pose. They are divisive and tend to be pretty controversial.
But without honesty, blunt remarks and transparency in controversial discussions no one learns anything, right?
Acts 26 (Read it here)
Paul begins by claiming that Agrippa is an "expert" in Jewish customs. (v. 3) How can a Roman king be an expert in Jewish customs? Agrippa was given the responsibility to oversee the Jewish temple, appoint and remove its high priest(s) beginning in 48 AD (the current year in Acts 26 is 59 AD, by the way). Agrippa was also allotted an extensive amount of money from Nero to make renovations to Jerusalem in 55 AD. Don't get me wrong, because he had the power to choose the temple's leaders, he was not liked by Jews. For many of his selections created plenty of controversies, as Paul put it.
Paul declares that he was raised and educated in all thing Jewish and became part of the strictest sect of Judaism, the Pharisees. (vs. 4-5) The only difference between he and the current Pharisees is that Paul believes that Jesus has fulfilled God's promise of a Messiah. (v. 6) Paul is hated just because these Jews believe that Jesus is not the Messiah. (v. 7)
Before explaining how he came to be a Christ-follower himself, Paul tells Agrippa and the audience how he previously did everything [he] could to oppose the very name of Jesus. (v. 9) He was authorized, by these same priests and religious leaders who are accusing him today, to imprison and condemn followers of the Way to death, no matter where they were! (v. 10) Paul even tortured believers some until they cursed the name of Jesus! (v. 11)
While on a mission to Damascus to do more of the same, all that changed when he and his companions met Jesus Christ. Here we become aware of more of the conversation Paul had with Jesus. It was then that Paul was told that his "mission" was useless against [Jesus'] will. (vs. 12-14) Actually, in verse 14 in the original Greek, Jesus says, "It is hard for you to kick against the oxgoads." Huh? A goad is a spiked stick that drives cattle, much like a whip drives a thoroughbred. Jesus is basically telling Paul, "I hold the goad, you're the ox, know your role!"
With this, Jesus redefined his life and mission by commissioning him to be a witness and preacher of the gospel to the Jews AND GENTILES! (vs. 16-17)
At least Paul would not be interrupted by boos here in the presence of a Gentile king.
Jesus says that the gospel would open their (both Jews and Gentiles) eyes from darkness to light, from the power of Satan to God. (v. 18) This brings about a controversial question, "Is Jesus suggesting that anyone who does not follow him is evil?" Depending on your worldview, you'll answer that question differently. It literally comes down to how you view humanity. Do you think people are generally good and always gravitate to good deeds? This is called humanism. Or do you think that we all are flawed and naturally want to do what is sinful and only best for ourselves? This is the biblical stance.
I honestly believe that people get caught up on that question because the word evil suggests extreme wickedness. It is like me saying that everyone is a murderer or Satan in the flesh. The truth is that evil is the opposite and absence of God. When we do anything contrary to what the Bible teaches, anything malicious against someone else or anything for selfish ambition, that is the opposite character of God, who is holy. The opposite of holy is evil. Or does sinful sound better?
I can assure you that my thoughts, actions and instincts are generally not beneficial, encouraging and uplifting. I am evil through and through. Paul says the same thing about himself in Romans 7:14-15. A question I always pose is, do you have to teach a toddler to do good or bad? They automatically want to pout, not share and want everything their way. Without any discipline many adults have grown up to exhibit the same characteristics!
Sorry for the rabbit trail. Back to Paul's testimony.
Paul tells Agrippa that he obeyed Jesus and immediately preached thereafter in Damascus, throughout all Judea and also to the Gentiles. (vs. 19-20) Another rabbit trail lures me when Paul says, in the latter half of verse 20, true repentance should be followed by confirmation of the good things they do. If someone does what we would consider "good things" before becoming a Christ-follower, are they really considered "good things" to God?
I just thought that was an interesting question.
It was after preaching this message that he was arrested in the temple and continual attempts were made on his life (v. 21) but again, it was God's will for him to survive to testify to everyone. (v. 21) He teaches nothing but what Moses and the rest of the Old Testaments said would happen. Jesus, again, fulfilled the ancient prophecies, that said the "Messiah would suffer and be the first to rise from the dead and announce God’s light to Jews and Gentiles.” (v. 23) Seems pretty clear to me and it does, too, to Paul and he can't understand why it isn't that clear to everyone else.
Festus, not the Jewish expert, is thoroughly confused by this and suggests that Paul is insane. (v. 24) But Paul knows that Agrippa is understanding everything. (v. 26) Agrippa is, indeed, an expert on Jewish customs and Judaism. But when Paul asks Agrippa for confirmation, he is interrupted by a profound statement. In the New Living Translation, which I've been using, we read, "Do you think you can persuade me to become a Christian so quickly?” (v. 28) This question suggests that Agrippa is not that impressed, maybe even slightly agitated, with Paul's lecture.
However, if we were to parse the original Greek phrase more carefully, here's a narrower interpretation of what Agrippa might have said to Paul.
“A little more, and your arguments would make me a Christian.”
That's quite different, eh? The NLT implies that Agrippa gave a rhetorical question as a response but the original Greek would suggest that Agrippa was definitely impressed and moved by Paul's words!
As Agrippa, Festus and the others left, they all agreed that Paul hadn't done anything to deserve death or imprisonment. (v. 31) However, they now know the whole story and can relate that to Caesar (Nero).
So, Paul will be shipped to Rome for just that. But it won't be smooth sailing (pun intended).
Questions
1.) What would it be like to fight against God's will? What do you think would happen to all your plans and desires? What do you think would've happened to Paul if he would've ignored Jesus? That's just it! No one would ignore Jesus if they same him face to face, right?
2.) How do you view humanity or yourself? Are you more in line with humanism or with the biblical definition of the fallen state of humankind? What makes you think this way?
3.) I'll pose this question again and just let you answer it. If someone does what we would consider "good things" before becoming a Christ-follower, are those deeds considered "good things" to God or just to us? Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment