Good evening, ladies and gents! Today we'll see that Saul will be knocked down to the ground and that his past leads people to distrust him and his present confidence almost gets him killed, TWICE!
Let's dig in together!
Acts 9 (Read it here)
Saul becomes more aggressive in his pursuit not only to disband the church but he is eager to kill the Lord's followers. (v. 1) He even wanted to ask local priests to assist him in arresting any followers of the Way that attended synagogue. (v. 2)
The Way was simply a nickname of the early church. Its unclear exactly what the symbolism behind The Way is. It could possibly refer to Jesus referring to himself as "the way, the truth and the life" in John 14:6 or it could simply refer to the didache (did-da-chee), which are the teachings, that Jesus initially taught and his apostles continued, of the way of God. The Way of God is mentioned in Matthew 22:16, by the "way."
Saul was heading to Damascus as a Pharisee on a mission to end this blasphemous movement. A bright light from heaven points him out, he and the men traveling with him drop to the ground in submission. They hear the voice of Jesus asking, "Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting me?" (vs. 3-4, Paul mentions his companion falling to the ground in Acts 26:13-14)
Notice how Jesus says that the persecution is directed at him? Contemporary persecution is no different, it still breaks God heart because not only does it rob his created beings of their freedom and/or lives but also the hatred is unmistakably directed to Him, too. After all, believers are the Body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 12:12) This is one of those things that should break our hearts because it breaks our Father's. Check out more info about persecuted Christ-followers around the world at www.persecution.com.
Back to Saul. The men that were with Saul were freaking out because they heard Jesus' voice but saw nothing. (v. 7) When Saul got up off the ground, he was blind. The man who was this ruthless leader on mission was now being led by the hand with the assistance of his followers. Instant humility. (v. 8)
He stayed in Damascus for three days and fasted from food and water. (v. 9) No doubt this was in response to learning of how he was going against God. He was in deep prayer and repentance.
Jesus sent a man named Ananias (not the same Ananias that was married to Sapphira, obviously; that dude is dead) to go find Saul and lay hands on him so that he may regain his sight. (vs. 11-12) I'm paraphrasing Ananias here, "Hold up, God! I know who this guy is! He's the one that's been arresting and trying to kill all the believers! And you want me to go to him?! That's ridiculous!"
Jesus lets Ananias know that the game has changed and Saul is now on their side. Jesus had chosen Saul to be the man to take [God's] message to the Gentiles and to kings, as well as to the people of Israel. Saul will also know what its like to be persecuted; he's about to walk in the believers' shoes. (vs. 15-16)
Ananias did as he was told; completely believing Jesus. Saul's sight was restored and he was filled with the Holy Spirit. (v. 17) Immediately after, he was baptized and had a meal (vs. 18).
Just a few days later, Saul changed his tune in no humble way. He went straight to the synagogues in Damascus and began to recant of his mistake and preach that Jesus is indeed the Son of God! (v. 20)
The chief prosecutor of Christianity has become one of its biggest proponents.
Everybody who heard him preach had the same reaction as Ananias, "Isn't this the same guy who caused such persecution and fear among Jesus' followers? Didn't he come to Damascus to arrest us?" (v. 21) Even though Saul was saying all the right things, could it be a clever trick?
Saul kept preaching with so much power and authority that he was being targeted for persecution by Jewish religious leaders. (vs. 22-23) When Christ-followers learned of plots to kill Saul, they came to his rescue. In some cases they would notify him of the plots and in others they would help him escape the city unharmed. At least some believers began to trust him. (vs. 24-25)
The chief persecutor has now become the persecuted, just as Jesus said he would.
The believers didn't trust Saul in Jerusalem, though. (v. 26) However, Barnabus (who would become his traveling companion and had been with the church from the very beginning) came to his defense and told the believers about Saul's conversion experience with Jesus on the way to Damascus and how he had been preaching powerfully, too. (v. 27)
Saul began to hang with the apostles and preaching with them but he didn't mesh well with the Greek-speaking Jews (Saul was a Hebrew-speaking Jew, by the way) and we talked about the animosity that had been present there before in Acts 6:1 (apparently it hadn't gone way, either). To protect Saul, he was sent to his hometown to preach (v. 30)
Since Saul had been converted to the faith, the church experienced peace throughout the land. (v. 31)
--------------------
Peter is busy, preaching non-stop from town to town until he comes to this place called Lydda. (v. 32) There he heals a man named Aeneas and because of this amazing feat, (Aeneas had been bed-ridden for 8 YEARS!!) the whole population both Lydda and Sharon repented and believed in God! (vs. 33-35)
Before now, Jesus is the only one in the New Testament to have resurrected anyone, but now Peter is given that honor. There are many similarities between Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead (see John 11) and Peter doing the same for Tabitha. They both are urged to come days after the person had died (Lazarus had been dead for 4 days, Tabitha for 2). Both Lazarus and Tabitha's bodies were prepared to be buried. And, of course, when they both arrived they experienced several mourners.
No doubt Peter was moved with compassion for Tabitha's friends. Tabitha had spent a lot of time serving others. Peter, being alone with Tabitha's corpse, prayed and demanded her to, "Get up!" (v. 40) And she did! Just as in Lydda and Sharon, many in Joppa came to know Christ after that day.
Questions
1.) How do you think Saul felt when he discovered that he was, in fact, persecuting Jesus the real Son of God? How do you think that reaction effected his preaching? How would you react if you were in his shoes?
2.) Saul goes from killing Christians to being nearly killed by other religious leaders and even Greek-speaking Christ-followers!! If you have decided to follow Christ, have you experienced a separation from those you used to hang with? If so, is your relationship with those people tense? Do you have tense relationships with certain other Christ-followers? If so, explain.
3.) Aeneas and Tabitha both had tragic things happen to them; paralysis and death. Many would struggle with doubt and curse God, blaming Him for their misfortune. However, both of these tragic events were used by God in order to get many, many people to believe in God's power and goodness. Have you seen something tragic be used for good by God? If so, what? Are you willing to go through something bad to be used by God? Have you been through something tragic that can be used by God? If so, what and how could it be used?
February 18, 2012
February 16, 2012
Day 39 - Acts 8
You may have noticed that I did not post last night. I just recently started my new job at Mission Hospital here in Asheville and my schedule will be radically different from what it was. I will be studying and writing some in the morning, working all day and getting off at 8pm only to, hopefully, post sometime before it gets really late.
If I do post late (say midnight or later), I'll post a comment to my original post on Facebook so many of you will be able to see that I have posted the night before.
Thanks for understanding and reading along with me!
Acts 8 (Read it here)
Simon, who is introduced in verse 9, was a sorcerer who claimed to be of God. People listened to him intently because his magic was spectacular. (v. 11) What he actually taught is not noted by Luke.
But with Philip's presence within Samaria, Simon's influence quickly evaporated. Many Samaritans not only believed Philip's message regarding the Kingdom of God and Jesus as Messiah but they also stepped out and confessed that faith by way of baptism, including Simon! (vs. 12-13) Simon even began to follow Philip and soak in everything he could.
The apostles hear about what's going on in Samaria, so Peter and John go to check it out. (v. 14)
Verses 15-17 are confusing at the outset. How could these Samaritans believe and be baptized yet not have the Holy Spirit? Didn't the Peter say in Acts 2:38-39 when preaching to the crowd at Pentecost, "Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?" He even continued to say, "This promise is to you, and to your children, and even to the Gentiles—all who have been called by the Lord our God.”
Before you start to think that here lies a contradiction and therefore the whole validity of the gospel is in question, let me give you two observations:
1. I emboldened the word Gentiles because Samaritans are not Gentiles. Of course, they're not Jews, either. They neither because their both, being a mixed-race. Samaritans, in most cases, were treated worse than Gentiles by Jews. So when Peter refers to Gentiles, he is not lopping in the Samaritans with them.
2. In Acts 6:3-5, it is clear that Philip is full of the Spirit. Even prior to that, in Acts 4:31, when all the believers gathered in prayer, everyone there was filled with the Spirit. But, having the Spirit and having the authority to impart (or give out) the Spirit are two totally different things. As far as we know, only Jesus (to the apostles at Pentecost) and the apostles themselves (following Peter's preaching in Acts 2) are the only beings who can impart the Spirit. So when Peter and John arrive in Samaria, they are coming to do just that. And its not completely up to them, either. Peter and John have to ask God in prayer for Him to release the Spirit to these Samaritan men and women. (v. 15, of course God blesses their request in v. 17)
This is another fantastic example of how baptism does NOT have any spiritual or magical power that gives its recipient the Holy Spirit or salvation.
Simon was so impressed with Peter and John's power that he offered to purchase it from them. (v. 18)
Of course, Peter being who he is (passionate with a double-portion of impulsiveness yet full of the Spirit), really rails on Simon for even thinking such a deal was possible. (v. 20)
Peter exhibits Jesus-like ability to read Simon like an open book, calling him wicked, bitter and jealous. (vs. 22-23) Peter is dead on with his read because Simon asks for prayer so these things...won't happen to me." (v. 24)
--------------------
Philip is convinced to travel more south from Jerusalem towards Gaza. (v. 26) On the road he meets up with a small caravan in which the treasurer of Ethiopia was sitting on top of a carriage reading aloud from the Old Testament book of Isaiah. (vs. 27-28) This man was a eunuch. Just so you know, eunuchs were men who had been forced into castration (their testicles were removed) in order to fulfill a specific purpose, usually to be a keeper of women (most of the time women who were married to men in power, such as wives of kings, emperors, governors, etc.) The word eunuch in Greek literally means bed keeper.
Philip hears the Scripture being read and offers his instruction. The eunuch happened to be reading Isaiah 53:7-8 which was all predicting about the coming of Jesus and the suffering he would endure. Philip informed the eunuch of this truth (and more) in verse 35.
I can imagine the great conversation they were having; the eunuch was having his world being reshaped at the teaching of Philip. The caravan came upon a ditch and the eunuch immediately wanted to be baptized. (v. 37) Apparently, Philip had mentioned the importance of baptism as a mode of confession. Philip gladly baptized him! (v. 38)
I don't know exactly how this next part works, but Philip is "snatched away" by the Spirit of the Lord. (v. 39). The very next verse its like Philip looks around and notices that he has been transported north to Azotus (about 44 miles from Gaza) and Philip continued going north and preaching to every town along the way to Caesarea (Azotus was about 95 miles from Caesarea).
I can almost guarantee that Philip was commanded to travel without food, extra clothes and money like the disciples were by Jesus, making this little mission trip all the more impressive (especially if he were by himself).
Questions
1.) Who can give out the Holy Spirit today? I don't really know the answer to this (I have a pretty good idea), so I'm throwing it out as a complete and transparent question to get you thinking.
2.) Are you like the eunuch in that you're willing to admit your ignorance and ask for someone else's wisdom and instruction regarding the Bible, spiritual matters and other things? Or are you more guarded or worried about looking stupid? Why?
3.) Are you like Philip in that you're willing to help others who have questions about Jesus, the faith or other spiritual matters that you can easily answer? Or are you worried about saying something wrong and/or seeming like a goody-goody? Why?
If I do post late (say midnight or later), I'll post a comment to my original post on Facebook so many of you will be able to see that I have posted the night before.
Thanks for understanding and reading along with me!
Acts 8 (Read it here)
After the previous post, it is good to note that a few devout Christ-followers came and removed Stephen’s body and gave it a proper burial. (v. 2)
Saul (who would become known as Paul later in Acts) was greatly inspired to inflict persecution on believers in an attempt to disband the church after the stoning of Stephen. He attempted to do this “legally” by throwing them all in prison and putting each on trial in order to possibly execute them as they did Stephen. (v. 3) So much for Gamaliel’s advice, right? (See Acts 5:33-40 for a refresher)
The high council had agreed with Gamaliel that if this movement didn’t cease after Jesus’ death then it would be like fighting against God and what He intends.The intensity of Stephen’s accusations sparked such a hatred for Christ-followers that a great wave of persecution began that day over Jerusalem. Everyone except the apostles got out of dodge (left the region)! (v. 1)
To prove that this persecution didn't really effect the believers, Luke tells about Philip's experience in Samaria (this is the Philip who was chosen along with Stephen and five others to distribute food in Acts 6:5, not to be confused with the apostle with the same name). Philip preached and performed miracles there. (vs. 5-6) This goes to show that the Spirit was present and being used by every believer who was bold enough to stand out for God (not just for the big wigs like Peter, Stephen wasn't even an apostle).
I also want to remind you of where Philip is; he's in Samaria! Even though Philip is of Greek descent, this new Christian faith was still regarded as a Jewish sect. Jews and Samaritans don't mix (Samaritans were considered half-breeds who didn't have a pure religion) but that doesn't stop Philip from preaching about Jesus Christ (who was also a Jew). You'll see later that not every apostle felt it was their responsibility to preach to non-Jews. Yet Samaria accepted Philip and the message of Jesus with open arms, which was not a small feat to accomplish. (v. 8)
Simon, who is introduced in verse 9, was a sorcerer who claimed to be of God. People listened to him intently because his magic was spectacular. (v. 11) What he actually taught is not noted by Luke.
But with Philip's presence within Samaria, Simon's influence quickly evaporated. Many Samaritans not only believed Philip's message regarding the Kingdom of God and Jesus as Messiah but they also stepped out and confessed that faith by way of baptism, including Simon! (vs. 12-13) Simon even began to follow Philip and soak in everything he could.
The apostles hear about what's going on in Samaria, so Peter and John go to check it out. (v. 14)
Verses 15-17 are confusing at the outset. How could these Samaritans believe and be baptized yet not have the Holy Spirit? Didn't the Peter say in Acts 2:38-39 when preaching to the crowd at Pentecost, "Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?" He even continued to say, "This promise is to you, and to your children, and even to the Gentiles—all who have been called by the Lord our God.”
Before you start to think that here lies a contradiction and therefore the whole validity of the gospel is in question, let me give you two observations:
1. I emboldened the word Gentiles because Samaritans are not Gentiles. Of course, they're not Jews, either. They neither because their both, being a mixed-race. Samaritans, in most cases, were treated worse than Gentiles by Jews. So when Peter refers to Gentiles, he is not lopping in the Samaritans with them.
2. In Acts 6:3-5, it is clear that Philip is full of the Spirit. Even prior to that, in Acts 4:31, when all the believers gathered in prayer, everyone there was filled with the Spirit. But, having the Spirit and having the authority to impart (or give out) the Spirit are two totally different things. As far as we know, only Jesus (to the apostles at Pentecost) and the apostles themselves (following Peter's preaching in Acts 2) are the only beings who can impart the Spirit. So when Peter and John arrive in Samaria, they are coming to do just that. And its not completely up to them, either. Peter and John have to ask God in prayer for Him to release the Spirit to these Samaritan men and women. (v. 15, of course God blesses their request in v. 17)
This is another fantastic example of how baptism does NOT have any spiritual or magical power that gives its recipient the Holy Spirit or salvation.
Simon was so impressed with Peter and John's power that he offered to purchase it from them. (v. 18)
Of course, Peter being who he is (passionate with a double-portion of impulsiveness yet full of the Spirit), really rails on Simon for even thinking such a deal was possible. (v. 20)
Peter exhibits Jesus-like ability to read Simon like an open book, calling him wicked, bitter and jealous. (vs. 22-23) Peter is dead on with his read because Simon asks for prayer so these things...won't happen to me." (v. 24)
--------------------
Philip is convinced to travel more south from Jerusalem towards Gaza. (v. 26) On the road he meets up with a small caravan in which the treasurer of Ethiopia was sitting on top of a carriage reading aloud from the Old Testament book of Isaiah. (vs. 27-28) This man was a eunuch. Just so you know, eunuchs were men who had been forced into castration (their testicles were removed) in order to fulfill a specific purpose, usually to be a keeper of women (most of the time women who were married to men in power, such as wives of kings, emperors, governors, etc.) The word eunuch in Greek literally means bed keeper.
Philip hears the Scripture being read and offers his instruction. The eunuch happened to be reading Isaiah 53:7-8 which was all predicting about the coming of Jesus and the suffering he would endure. Philip informed the eunuch of this truth (and more) in verse 35.
I can imagine the great conversation they were having; the eunuch was having his world being reshaped at the teaching of Philip. The caravan came upon a ditch and the eunuch immediately wanted to be baptized. (v. 37) Apparently, Philip had mentioned the importance of baptism as a mode of confession. Philip gladly baptized him! (v. 38)
I don't know exactly how this next part works, but Philip is "snatched away" by the Spirit of the Lord. (v. 39). The very next verse its like Philip looks around and notices that he has been transported north to Azotus (about 44 miles from Gaza) and Philip continued going north and preaching to every town along the way to Caesarea (Azotus was about 95 miles from Caesarea).
I can almost guarantee that Philip was commanded to travel without food, extra clothes and money like the disciples were by Jesus, making this little mission trip all the more impressive (especially if he were by himself).
Questions
1.) Who can give out the Holy Spirit today? I don't really know the answer to this (I have a pretty good idea), so I'm throwing it out as a complete and transparent question to get you thinking.
2.) Are you like the eunuch in that you're willing to admit your ignorance and ask for someone else's wisdom and instruction regarding the Bible, spiritual matters and other things? Or are you more guarded or worried about looking stupid? Why?
3.) Are you like Philip in that you're willing to help others who have questions about Jesus, the faith or other spiritual matters that you can easily answer? Or are you worried about saying something wrong and/or seeming like a goody-goody? Why?
February 15, 2012
Day 38 - Acts 7
I'll go ahead and forewarn you that there are some pretty graphic and gnarly details in today's post. I pray that it not only grabs your attention but allows you to feel emotionally tied to the persecution that was and still is experienced by Christ-followers to this day.
Let's get to it.
Acts 7 (Read it here)
When we left off yesterday Stephen was being dragged to trial after schooling some men at the synagogue. These men spread a whole bunch of nasty rumors that got him arrested and brought before the high council.
The high priest gave an opportunity for Stephen to defend himself by asking, "Are these accusations true?" (v. 1)
Stephen replies with, literally, a survey of most of the Old Testament. He mentions all of the patriarchs of the faith (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, etc) and, basically, summarizes from Genesis 12 (Abraham leaving his native land, current day Iraq, to what is now Syria) to 1 Kings 5 (Solomon building the temple).
So if you ever wanted a condensed version of the Old Testament, reread what Stephen had to say between Acts 7:2-50 again. He even quotes the prophets Amos and Isaiah. (vs. 43, 50)
This was a good indication that Stephen was most likely formally educated by a rabbi (which also hints that Stephen was probably brought up in a wealthy family). Even children and teenagers who were fortunate enough to be trained in the yeshiva (the main arena for learning the Torah, the first five books of the Bible) didn't get a comprehensive study of the prophetical books, too.
Anyway, back to Acts 7. It seems that Stephen is primarily telling the whole story before hinting at his point around verse 35, where Moses is rejected by his own people prior to the exodus. Even though Moses did lead the Israelites out of Egypt and the bonds of slavery and predicted that a savior figure/prophet would come (Jesus would easily fit this billing), he and God were constantly rejected (see verses 39-40).
God permitted the Israelites to worship whomever they wanted, but it came with its own consequence. It was God who had rescued them from Egypt, it was God that had provided water from a rock and manna (like crackers or wafers) from heaven. (See Exodus 17:1-7 and Exodus 16, respectively)
To get the full gravity of what Stephen is talking about, it is worth talking about the two pagan gods of Molech and Rephan. (v. 43) Molech is mentioned 16 times in the Bible and one of the most detestable acts of worship that was required by Molech was the sacrifice of children, primarily the firstborn. (See Leviticus 18:21).
Rephan was another name for Saturn, the god of the stars, and was the Bible's version of worship via astronomy. Rephan was particularly worshiped for his control over agriculture and the harvest. It was in observance of Rephan (or Saturn) that gave the date of what we know as the Christmas season, which began on December 17 and ended on the 25th. Christians simply began celebrating Jesus' birth to "overshadow" the worship and celebration of Saturn.
God, himself, ridiculed the Israelites for the creation of idols; idols made from wood and stone—gods that [can't] see nor hear nor eat nor smell. (Deuteronomy 4:28)
If God could describe the Israelite people in one word, He would have been accurate in choosing the word stubborn. They continually complained against, rebelled and rejected God.
In verse 51, Israelites are described by God as stubborn, heathen at heart, deaf to the truth and those who resist the Holy Spirit!
Even though the council may have been rolling their eyes, wondering when Stephen would ever stop giving his lecture, Stephen grabs their attention by implying that the apple didn't fall far from the tree.
Stephen says, "That’s what your ancestors did, and so do you! Name one prophet your ancestors didn’t persecute! They even killed the ones who predicted the coming of the Righteous One—the Messiah whom you betrayed and murdered. You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, even though you received it from the hands of angels.” (vs. 52-53)
Do you understand the intensity of the insult that Stephen just laid down? He called the council the equivalent of
baby killers,
star worshiping-pagans,
stubborn,
impure at heart,
those who ignore God and the truth!!
Take any brutally honest talking-to that Jesus or Peter ever gave and multiply it times a thousand!
Stephen spoke with the full measure of the Holy Spirit and, Luke says in verse 55, sees God and Jesus in heaven at that momen! He pays no attention to the rage of the council and continues to prophecy about how he sees Jesus at the right hand of the Father. (v. 56)
The enraged men rushed at him, dragged him outside the city and began to throw stones at him. (v. 57)
Stoning was a way of performing capital punishment without one person carrying out the deed and being solely responsible. In many cases, the accused would suffer repeated strikes with stones (as big as accusers wanted to throw) until they fell unconscious, died or both. Again, in many cases, the punishment would end with an exceptionally large stone (big enough for at least 2 men to carry) dropped on the accused, which would be the fatal blow. This place would also turn out to be the accused's grave site, no formal burial was performed. Other than crucifixion, it was one of the slowest and most torturous ways to be killed.
I know that was graphic, but that fairly gives you respect for the fear that one must have had when being faced with such a punishment.
But Stephen is not phased! During his stoning, he prays two things that are eerily similar as to what Jesus said during his final moments on the cross: receive my spirit and don’t charge them with this sin (similar to 'forgive them, for they don’t know what they do')!
His final act was to ask for the angry mob's forgiveness. After that, he dies.
By the way, Saul (who would be later known as Paul, the writer of the majority of the New Testament) was there and in support of what he saw happening to Stephen. This was before he became a Christ-follower. His time is coming. We'll find out soon enough what happens to him here in the book of Acts.
Questions
1.) God describes idols as things that don't see, hear, eat or smell. Are there things in your life that interfere with getting to know God that fit this criteria? Name a few (you get bonus points if there made of wood or stone).
2.) Have you noticed the theme that the truth tends to get the truth-teller in trouble? Does that fear stop you from being completely honest? Why or why not?
3.) Stoning has since been outlawed in every country other than in countries that are majority Muslim. The most common crime that results in stoning today is adultery. Christ-followers can also be stoned for their faith. Do you see the connection? Both accused parties are punished for being with someone their not supposed to be with (one their not married to and Jesus, for example). Explain how you feel about knowing these facts.
Let's get to it.
Acts 7 (Read it here)
When we left off yesterday Stephen was being dragged to trial after schooling some men at the synagogue. These men spread a whole bunch of nasty rumors that got him arrested and brought before the high council.
The high priest gave an opportunity for Stephen to defend himself by asking, "Are these accusations true?" (v. 1)
Stephen replies with, literally, a survey of most of the Old Testament. He mentions all of the patriarchs of the faith (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, etc) and, basically, summarizes from Genesis 12 (Abraham leaving his native land, current day Iraq, to what is now Syria) to 1 Kings 5 (Solomon building the temple).
So if you ever wanted a condensed version of the Old Testament, reread what Stephen had to say between Acts 7:2-50 again. He even quotes the prophets Amos and Isaiah. (vs. 43, 50)
This was a good indication that Stephen was most likely formally educated by a rabbi (which also hints that Stephen was probably brought up in a wealthy family). Even children and teenagers who were fortunate enough to be trained in the yeshiva (the main arena for learning the Torah, the first five books of the Bible) didn't get a comprehensive study of the prophetical books, too.
Anyway, back to Acts 7. It seems that Stephen is primarily telling the whole story before hinting at his point around verse 35, where Moses is rejected by his own people prior to the exodus. Even though Moses did lead the Israelites out of Egypt and the bonds of slavery and predicted that a savior figure/prophet would come (Jesus would easily fit this billing), he and God were constantly rejected (see verses 39-40).
God permitted the Israelites to worship whomever they wanted, but it came with its own consequence. It was God who had rescued them from Egypt, it was God that had provided water from a rock and manna (like crackers or wafers) from heaven. (See Exodus 17:1-7 and Exodus 16, respectively)
To get the full gravity of what Stephen is talking about, it is worth talking about the two pagan gods of Molech and Rephan. (v. 43) Molech is mentioned 16 times in the Bible and one of the most detestable acts of worship that was required by Molech was the sacrifice of children, primarily the firstborn. (See Leviticus 18:21).
Rephan was another name for Saturn, the god of the stars, and was the Bible's version of worship via astronomy. Rephan was particularly worshiped for his control over agriculture and the harvest. It was in observance of Rephan (or Saturn) that gave the date of what we know as the Christmas season, which began on December 17 and ended on the 25th. Christians simply began celebrating Jesus' birth to "overshadow" the worship and celebration of Saturn.
God, himself, ridiculed the Israelites for the creation of idols; idols made from wood and stone—gods that [can't] see nor hear nor eat nor smell. (Deuteronomy 4:28)
If God could describe the Israelite people in one word, He would have been accurate in choosing the word stubborn. They continually complained against, rebelled and rejected God.
In verse 51, Israelites are described by God as stubborn, heathen at heart, deaf to the truth and those who resist the Holy Spirit!
Even though the council may have been rolling their eyes, wondering when Stephen would ever stop giving his lecture, Stephen grabs their attention by implying that the apple didn't fall far from the tree.
Stephen says, "That’s what your ancestors did, and so do you! Name one prophet your ancestors didn’t persecute! They even killed the ones who predicted the coming of the Righteous One—the Messiah whom you betrayed and murdered. You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, even though you received it from the hands of angels.” (vs. 52-53)
Do you understand the intensity of the insult that Stephen just laid down? He called the council the equivalent of
baby killers,
star worshiping-pagans,
stubborn,
impure at heart,
those who ignore God and the truth!!
Take any brutally honest talking-to that Jesus or Peter ever gave and multiply it times a thousand!
Stephen spoke with the full measure of the Holy Spirit and, Luke says in verse 55, sees God and Jesus in heaven at that momen! He pays no attention to the rage of the council and continues to prophecy about how he sees Jesus at the right hand of the Father. (v. 56)
The enraged men rushed at him, dragged him outside the city and began to throw stones at him. (v. 57)
Stoning was a way of performing capital punishment without one person carrying out the deed and being solely responsible. In many cases, the accused would suffer repeated strikes with stones (as big as accusers wanted to throw) until they fell unconscious, died or both. Again, in many cases, the punishment would end with an exceptionally large stone (big enough for at least 2 men to carry) dropped on the accused, which would be the fatal blow. This place would also turn out to be the accused's grave site, no formal burial was performed. Other than crucifixion, it was one of the slowest and most torturous ways to be killed.
I know that was graphic, but that fairly gives you respect for the fear that one must have had when being faced with such a punishment.
But Stephen is not phased! During his stoning, he prays two things that are eerily similar as to what Jesus said during his final moments on the cross: receive my spirit and don’t charge them with this sin (similar to 'forgive them, for they don’t know what they do')!
His final act was to ask for the angry mob's forgiveness. After that, he dies.
By the way, Saul (who would be later known as Paul, the writer of the majority of the New Testament) was there and in support of what he saw happening to Stephen. This was before he became a Christ-follower. His time is coming. We'll find out soon enough what happens to him here in the book of Acts.
Questions
1.) God describes idols as things that don't see, hear, eat or smell. Are there things in your life that interfere with getting to know God that fit this criteria? Name a few (you get bonus points if there made of wood or stone).
2.) Have you noticed the theme that the truth tends to get the truth-teller in trouble? Does that fear stop you from being completely honest? Why or why not?
3.) Stoning has since been outlawed in every country other than in countries that are majority Muslim. The most common crime that results in stoning today is adultery. Christ-followers can also be stoned for their faith. Do you see the connection? Both accused parties are punished for being with someone their not supposed to be with (one their not married to and Jesus, for example). Explain how you feel about knowing these facts.
February 13, 2012
Day 37 - Acts 6
You guys are fortunate! Today's chapter is only 15 verses long, so today's will be a short post.
Let's get into it!
Acts 6 (Read it here)
The more the group of believers grew, the more things were missed. Anyone who has ever started a ministry would know that its great to start with 10 coming to a service, but when you hit 50, 60, 70 people, even the simplest tasks can become much more difficult to remember and monitor effectively. One of the things that bothered Greek-speaking believers was that their widows were not being fed as much as Hebrew-speaking believers. (v. 1)
As if women and, worse yet, widows didn't have it bad enough. If you were a Greek-speaking widow, even some Christ-followers wouldn't think you were worthy of getting the same amount of food as Hebrew-speaking widows.
The most viable reason for this discrimination was that Greek-speaking Jews had adopted the custom of primarily using the Greek language for use in worship settings and even translating the Old Testament from its original language (which was Hebrew). To a Hebrew-speaking believer this was most likely seen as being proponents of Roman culture, the customs of the enemy.
I find it ironic, however, that the New Testament was written in Greek first and then later translated into Hebrew.
The apostles got together and decided to delegate this responsibility to able, respected, Spirit-filled and wise men so that they could continue to focus on teaching God's word. (vs. 2-3) I think it is important to note that the apostles selected men to serve women (a practice in humility) and that those men would've been seen as leaders (Spirit-filled). The first just became last.
This decision brought about unity since "everyone liked this idea." (v. 5) The seven men were brought to the apostles and were prayed over before beginning this ministry. Again, I can't stress this enough, this work was not tedious, menial, grunt work. James, the half-brother of Jesus, would echo the sentiments of the Old Testament prophets when he wrote that, "Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress." (James 1:27) Fixing this issue was a high priority to everyone involved.
Did you notice that some of the priests (no doubt part of the most anti-Christians of that time) also became Christ-followers during this time? (v. 7)
--------------------
Stephen, the most notable of the seven men selected to carry out this ministry, became known as a man who was "full of God's grace and power." He started to perform miracles as the apostles had done. (v. 8)
Just in case you're curious, the men in verse 9 who debated with Stephen, were former slaves of Jewish masters who were freed but remained Jewish in their faith (in other words, not Christ-followers).
Even though a synagogue full of these men started this debate, the wisdom with which Stephen spoke couldn't be matched. (v. 10) Stephen's superior wisdom belittled these free men so much that they began to get their friends, peers and family to lie about Stephen. They falsely accused him of saying heretical and irreverent things about Moses, God and the Temple. (vs. 11, 14)
This apparently worked because the same high council that had previously arrested the apostles on three separate occasions had Stephen arrested, too. (v. 12)
Luke ends the chapter, in verse 15, with saying that Stephen's face was "bright as an angel's." This
is very reminiscing of what happened to Moses when he saw and conversed with God face-to-face. (Check out Exodus 34:28-35) Moses' face had the same type of glow to it after speaking with God. This should have been a clue to the council that Stephen was being used by God, but like the religious leaders before them, they chose only what they themselves wanted to believe.
You'll see what happens with Stephen tomorrow in Acts 7...and it won't be pretty.
Questions
1.) The early Christ-followers experienced division when the Hebrew-speaking believers thought they were better than their Greek-speaking brothers and sisters. Churches still inexplicably experience this division when ministering to homosexuals, for example (as if God loves the heterosexual more than the homosexual). Or do you feel irritated when someone of Hispanic or Latino descent struggles or cannot speak English? Why do you think people naturally feel, in certain situations, like they are better than other people?
2.) How do you think Stephen and the other six men responded when they were chosen to make sure that all widows received the same amount of food (considering they were men chosen to serve women)?
3.) Do you find that others will lie about you when you speak the truth? What kind of things have been spread about you by those who wanted to tear you down?
Let's get into it!
Acts 6 (Read it here)
The more the group of believers grew, the more things were missed. Anyone who has ever started a ministry would know that its great to start with 10 coming to a service, but when you hit 50, 60, 70 people, even the simplest tasks can become much more difficult to remember and monitor effectively. One of the things that bothered Greek-speaking believers was that their widows were not being fed as much as Hebrew-speaking believers. (v. 1)
As if women and, worse yet, widows didn't have it bad enough. If you were a Greek-speaking widow, even some Christ-followers wouldn't think you were worthy of getting the same amount of food as Hebrew-speaking widows.
The most viable reason for this discrimination was that Greek-speaking Jews had adopted the custom of primarily using the Greek language for use in worship settings and even translating the Old Testament from its original language (which was Hebrew). To a Hebrew-speaking believer this was most likely seen as being proponents of Roman culture, the customs of the enemy.
I find it ironic, however, that the New Testament was written in Greek first and then later translated into Hebrew.
The apostles got together and decided to delegate this responsibility to able, respected, Spirit-filled and wise men so that they could continue to focus on teaching God's word. (vs. 2-3) I think it is important to note that the apostles selected men to serve women (a practice in humility) and that those men would've been seen as leaders (Spirit-filled). The first just became last.
This decision brought about unity since "everyone liked this idea." (v. 5) The seven men were brought to the apostles and were prayed over before beginning this ministry. Again, I can't stress this enough, this work was not tedious, menial, grunt work. James, the half-brother of Jesus, would echo the sentiments of the Old Testament prophets when he wrote that, "Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress." (James 1:27) Fixing this issue was a high priority to everyone involved.
Did you notice that some of the priests (no doubt part of the most anti-Christians of that time) also became Christ-followers during this time? (v. 7)
--------------------
Stephen, the most notable of the seven men selected to carry out this ministry, became known as a man who was "full of God's grace and power." He started to perform miracles as the apostles had done. (v. 8)
Just in case you're curious, the men in verse 9 who debated with Stephen, were former slaves of Jewish masters who were freed but remained Jewish in their faith (in other words, not Christ-followers).
Even though a synagogue full of these men started this debate, the wisdom with which Stephen spoke couldn't be matched. (v. 10) Stephen's superior wisdom belittled these free men so much that they began to get their friends, peers and family to lie about Stephen. They falsely accused him of saying heretical and irreverent things about Moses, God and the Temple. (vs. 11, 14)
This apparently worked because the same high council that had previously arrested the apostles on three separate occasions had Stephen arrested, too. (v. 12)
Luke ends the chapter, in verse 15, with saying that Stephen's face was "bright as an angel's." This
is very reminiscing of what happened to Moses when he saw and conversed with God face-to-face. (Check out Exodus 34:28-35) Moses' face had the same type of glow to it after speaking with God. This should have been a clue to the council that Stephen was being used by God, but like the religious leaders before them, they chose only what they themselves wanted to believe.
You'll see what happens with Stephen tomorrow in Acts 7...and it won't be pretty.
Questions
1.) The early Christ-followers experienced division when the Hebrew-speaking believers thought they were better than their Greek-speaking brothers and sisters. Churches still inexplicably experience this division when ministering to homosexuals, for example (as if God loves the heterosexual more than the homosexual). Or do you feel irritated when someone of Hispanic or Latino descent struggles or cannot speak English? Why do you think people naturally feel, in certain situations, like they are better than other people?
2.) How do you think Stephen and the other six men responded when they were chosen to make sure that all widows received the same amount of food (considering they were men chosen to serve women)?
3.) Do you find that others will lie about you when you speak the truth? What kind of things have been spread about you by those who wanted to tear you down?
February 11, 2012
Day 36 - Acts 5
This first part of this Acts 5 (the story of Ananias and Sapphira) has had me thinking all day long. I hope that each of you take the time to honestly think through and respond to the questions at the end. I pray that it encourages you.
Let's get going!
Acts 5 (Read it here)
If Barnabas was the prime example of one who gave up his possession for the betterment of all, then Ananias and Sapphira were wholly different examples. Like Barnabas, Ananias and Sapphira sold some property. They had the desire to do as other wealthy people had done in their church community.
Ananias, like the other benefactors, brought the donation to the apostles. However, Ananias kept some of the money from the sell, lied and said that it was the full amount. His wife knew about it and agreed to the deceit. (v. 2)
Somehow Peter has the ability to read right through the facade and calls Ananias out on it! Peter accuses Ananias of, "[lying] to the Holy Spirit!" (v. 3) The best case scenario is that Ananias and Sapphira were moved by the Spirit to sell the land and give the proceeds away, but Ananias decided to go back on that decision (perhaps they made a vow to God and broke it) and keep some of the money for himself. Worst case scenario would be that Ananias and Sapphira never had the intention of giving all the money, but definitely wanted all the recognition for doing such a good deed.
Peter even says that Ananias could've done whatever he wanted, sell the land or not sell it. He could've kept the money, kept some of it or give it all away. It wasn't that Ananias had lied to just him, but that he had gone against his word to God. (v. 4) Not to be cliche, but in this case honesty definitely was the best policy.
This was just the sort of thing that Jesus always called out and humiliated the religious leaders for. Fake religion that is only done for others' recognition always made Jesus' blood boil. It was like living a lie. In that case, God wasn't the inspiration. The recognition of others became a false god.
After hearing Peter's outrage, Ananias...dies. Everyone is freaked out. (v. 5)
Ananias was removed and quickly buried. (v. 6) No funeral, no nothing. Weird.
Sapphira comes in about three hours later and Peter gives her a golden opportunity not only to tell the truth but to save her own life by asking, “Was this the price you and your husband received for your land?” She fails the test by supplying the same lie as her husband. (v. 8)
Imagine hearing, right before you die, that your husband was just buried outside and now you will, too! Freaky!
She died instantly after Peter finishing speaking. The same men carried her out and buried her beside her husband. (v. 10) No doubt this became a prime example of what would happen if anyone were to lie to God and pretend to be humble just to gain prominence or popularity.
You may think, "What does this possibly have to do with me?" I believe there are two lessons to be learned from this story. We have previously noted that both Judas Iscariot and Peter were tempted by Satan to separate themselves from Jesus and betray him in one way or another. Have you noticed that Judas, Peter, Ananias and Sapphira all have one thing in common?
They are all part of the faith community (I would say 'church' but Judas and Peter experienced this before the church was actually established), they aren't "wicked, godless people." This goes to show you that Satan can have just as much influence with people inside the church as he does with those outside. That is why no one is safe from the temptation. Even pastors get caught in embezzling, money laundering, sex scandals and the like.
Christ-followers need to get it out of their heads that non-believers are evil and we, Christians, aren't. There is actually not that much difference between the two. We're both flawed, constantly tempted and always make mistakes. The only difference is that one seeks to live by the Spirit while the other tries to become a better person (or doesn't even care). That is why adhering to rules and religion never makes a person holy. Only God is holy.
Secondly, stretching the truth is something we all struggle with from time to time. I used to tell people that I graduated from high school 18th in my class (I wouldn't tell them that only 95 graduated with me) when I was really 20th. I don't know why 18th sounded so much better to me, but it did. Also, when I ran track and cross-country, I would shave a few seconds off my personal best times in the mile, 2-mile or 3-mile races in conversations, too.
I'd like to think I've never lied to God but that's not true, either. Have you ever made a promise to God that you would have that conversation with someone who needed to be corrected? Have you ever promised that you would go to church or read your Bible if God would bless you in a specific way? Personally, in the past, I would promise God that I wouldn't lust after women if he would give me a special young lady to date. Of course, I'd break that promise not too long after making it.
You also may think, "Why was Ananias and Sapphira's punishment so severe?" I only have one theory as to why. Yes, they lied to God, but so have many others. However, Luke states twice (vs. 5, 11) that the church was terrified by the news. God showed that He had zero tolerance for such behavior and the people shouldn't forget that. Stealing money is bad enough but isn't there something inside you that creeps you out more when money is stolen from a church? I believe that's because we have this reverence for the things that have been dedicated or given to God. And if they are stolen, don't we have this feeling inside that God will repay them for it (or some would say that fate or karma would catch up to them)?
The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira didn't stop the church from growing, though, as "more and more people believed and were brought to the Lord." (v. 14)
People held the apostles in such high regard that sick people would be brought to them so that Peter's shadow might fall across them. (v. 15) Peter's fame was growing so rapidly that people started to believed that Peter was just like Jesus (and for the most part, he was since Peter had been given the same power as Jesus to heal and preach).
The Sadducees had the apostles (its unclear as to exactly who or how many) arrested again. (v. 18) They must have been continuing to use the name of Jesus as they preached and healed.
But an angel broke them out and gave them the command to "go to the temple and [preach]." (vs. 19-20) There would be no rest for these guys! The high council was assembled to perform another trial against the apostles (v. 21) but, oops, the apostles are not in the jail cell! (v. 22)
Of course, the apostles are found preaching just as they had been instructed to by the angel! So the apostles were arrested (for the third time) and brought before the high council (again). The same story plays out as last time. "Don't do that!" (v. 28) Peter says, "We're not listening to you." (v. 29)
This time Peter is more bold in his proclamation about Jesus. In fact, Peter says the same thing that got Jesus condemned at his own trial when he said that Jesus was in the "place of honor at [God's] right hand." Peter is even more blunt in saying that Jesus is Prince [of Peace] and Savior. (v. 31)
The icing on the cake that really ticked off the council was when Peter implied that they (the religious leaders) were not filled with the Spirit because they do not obey God. (v. 32)
Most of the leaders were ready to have them killed right then and there, but they were halted by a respected Pharisee named Gamaliel. Gamaliel advised the high council not to jump to a quick sentencing. He referred to two guys who both started revolts against the government (Theudas and Judas of Galilee) but after they died their followers didn't continue the mission of their founder.
FYI - Theudas claimed to be a prophet (not necessarily the Messiah). Judas the Galilee started the violent sect called the Zealots (Sound familiar? That's because the apostle, Simon the Zealot, used to belong to this sect), whose purpose was to overthrow the government by use of force, assassination and literal backstabbing (yeah, they were basically terrorists). If you want to read more about Judas of Galilee check out this little article about him here.
Gamaliel proposed that they wait the apostles out. If its just of man, then it will die out. Yet, if its from God, you don't want to stand in the way of that! (vs. 38-39)
Even though the high council accepted Gamaliel's advice, the apostles were flogged as their punishment and warned, yet again, not to speak Jesus' name (v. 40)
However, the flogging had the opposite reaction than the council had intended. The apostles were pumped that they were able to suffer through the persecution for the glory of Jesus' name! (v. 41) And, yeah, they just kept preaching with more and more boldness, saying clearly, "Jesus is the Messiah." (v. 42)
Questions
1.) Do you struggle to be completely honest and transparent with people? Do you fudge details to make yourself sound a little better than you actually are? Why? Are those white lies dangerous or not?
2.) Have you ever made a promise to God? Did you keep it or break it? Why did you make a vow, did you want something in return? If so, what? (Did you know that Jesus advises not to take or make vows? See Matthew 5:33-37)
3.) How did Gamaliel's theory work out, by the way?
Let's get going!
Acts 5 (Read it here)
If Barnabas was the prime example of one who gave up his possession for the betterment of all, then Ananias and Sapphira were wholly different examples. Like Barnabas, Ananias and Sapphira sold some property. They had the desire to do as other wealthy people had done in their church community.
Ananias, like the other benefactors, brought the donation to the apostles. However, Ananias kept some of the money from the sell, lied and said that it was the full amount. His wife knew about it and agreed to the deceit. (v. 2)
Somehow Peter has the ability to read right through the facade and calls Ananias out on it! Peter accuses Ananias of, "[lying] to the Holy Spirit!" (v. 3) The best case scenario is that Ananias and Sapphira were moved by the Spirit to sell the land and give the proceeds away, but Ananias decided to go back on that decision (perhaps they made a vow to God and broke it) and keep some of the money for himself. Worst case scenario would be that Ananias and Sapphira never had the intention of giving all the money, but definitely wanted all the recognition for doing such a good deed.
Peter even says that Ananias could've done whatever he wanted, sell the land or not sell it. He could've kept the money, kept some of it or give it all away. It wasn't that Ananias had lied to just him, but that he had gone against his word to God. (v. 4) Not to be cliche, but in this case honesty definitely was the best policy.
This was just the sort of thing that Jesus always called out and humiliated the religious leaders for. Fake religion that is only done for others' recognition always made Jesus' blood boil. It was like living a lie. In that case, God wasn't the inspiration. The recognition of others became a false god.
After hearing Peter's outrage, Ananias...dies. Everyone is freaked out. (v. 5)
Ananias was removed and quickly buried. (v. 6) No funeral, no nothing. Weird.
Sapphira comes in about three hours later and Peter gives her a golden opportunity not only to tell the truth but to save her own life by asking, “Was this the price you and your husband received for your land?” She fails the test by supplying the same lie as her husband. (v. 8)
Imagine hearing, right before you die, that your husband was just buried outside and now you will, too! Freaky!
She died instantly after Peter finishing speaking. The same men carried her out and buried her beside her husband. (v. 10) No doubt this became a prime example of what would happen if anyone were to lie to God and pretend to be humble just to gain prominence or popularity.
You may think, "What does this possibly have to do with me?" I believe there are two lessons to be learned from this story. We have previously noted that both Judas Iscariot and Peter were tempted by Satan to separate themselves from Jesus and betray him in one way or another. Have you noticed that Judas, Peter, Ananias and Sapphira all have one thing in common?
They are all part of the faith community (I would say 'church' but Judas and Peter experienced this before the church was actually established), they aren't "wicked, godless people." This goes to show you that Satan can have just as much influence with people inside the church as he does with those outside. That is why no one is safe from the temptation. Even pastors get caught in embezzling, money laundering, sex scandals and the like.
Christ-followers need to get it out of their heads that non-believers are evil and we, Christians, aren't. There is actually not that much difference between the two. We're both flawed, constantly tempted and always make mistakes. The only difference is that one seeks to live by the Spirit while the other tries to become a better person (or doesn't even care). That is why adhering to rules and religion never makes a person holy. Only God is holy.
Secondly, stretching the truth is something we all struggle with from time to time. I used to tell people that I graduated from high school 18th in my class (I wouldn't tell them that only 95 graduated with me) when I was really 20th. I don't know why 18th sounded so much better to me, but it did. Also, when I ran track and cross-country, I would shave a few seconds off my personal best times in the mile, 2-mile or 3-mile races in conversations, too.
I'd like to think I've never lied to God but that's not true, either. Have you ever made a promise to God that you would have that conversation with someone who needed to be corrected? Have you ever promised that you would go to church or read your Bible if God would bless you in a specific way? Personally, in the past, I would promise God that I wouldn't lust after women if he would give me a special young lady to date. Of course, I'd break that promise not too long after making it.
You also may think, "Why was Ananias and Sapphira's punishment so severe?" I only have one theory as to why. Yes, they lied to God, but so have many others. However, Luke states twice (vs. 5, 11) that the church was terrified by the news. God showed that He had zero tolerance for such behavior and the people shouldn't forget that. Stealing money is bad enough but isn't there something inside you that creeps you out more when money is stolen from a church? I believe that's because we have this reverence for the things that have been dedicated or given to God. And if they are stolen, don't we have this feeling inside that God will repay them for it (or some would say that fate or karma would catch up to them)?
The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira didn't stop the church from growing, though, as "more and more people believed and were brought to the Lord." (v. 14)
People held the apostles in such high regard that sick people would be brought to them so that Peter's shadow might fall across them. (v. 15) Peter's fame was growing so rapidly that people started to believed that Peter was just like Jesus (and for the most part, he was since Peter had been given the same power as Jesus to heal and preach).
The Sadducees had the apostles (its unclear as to exactly who or how many) arrested again. (v. 18) They must have been continuing to use the name of Jesus as they preached and healed.
But an angel broke them out and gave them the command to "go to the temple and [preach]." (vs. 19-20) There would be no rest for these guys! The high council was assembled to perform another trial against the apostles (v. 21) but, oops, the apostles are not in the jail cell! (v. 22)
Of course, the apostles are found preaching just as they had been instructed to by the angel! So the apostles were arrested (for the third time) and brought before the high council (again). The same story plays out as last time. "Don't do that!" (v. 28) Peter says, "We're not listening to you." (v. 29)
This time Peter is more bold in his proclamation about Jesus. In fact, Peter says the same thing that got Jesus condemned at his own trial when he said that Jesus was in the "place of honor at [God's] right hand." Peter is even more blunt in saying that Jesus is Prince [of Peace] and Savior. (v. 31)
The icing on the cake that really ticked off the council was when Peter implied that they (the religious leaders) were not filled with the Spirit because they do not obey God. (v. 32)
Most of the leaders were ready to have them killed right then and there, but they were halted by a respected Pharisee named Gamaliel. Gamaliel advised the high council not to jump to a quick sentencing. He referred to two guys who both started revolts against the government (Theudas and Judas of Galilee) but after they died their followers didn't continue the mission of their founder.
FYI - Theudas claimed to be a prophet (not necessarily the Messiah). Judas the Galilee started the violent sect called the Zealots (Sound familiar? That's because the apostle, Simon the Zealot, used to belong to this sect), whose purpose was to overthrow the government by use of force, assassination and literal backstabbing (yeah, they were basically terrorists). If you want to read more about Judas of Galilee check out this little article about him here.
Gamaliel proposed that they wait the apostles out. If its just of man, then it will die out. Yet, if its from God, you don't want to stand in the way of that! (vs. 38-39)
Even though the high council accepted Gamaliel's advice, the apostles were flogged as their punishment and warned, yet again, not to speak Jesus' name (v. 40)
However, the flogging had the opposite reaction than the council had intended. The apostles were pumped that they were able to suffer through the persecution for the glory of Jesus' name! (v. 41) And, yeah, they just kept preaching with more and more boldness, saying clearly, "Jesus is the Messiah." (v. 42)
Questions
1.) Do you struggle to be completely honest and transparent with people? Do you fudge details to make yourself sound a little better than you actually are? Why? Are those white lies dangerous or not?
2.) Have you ever made a promise to God? Did you keep it or break it? Why did you make a vow, did you want something in return? If so, what? (Did you know that Jesus advises not to take or make vows? See Matthew 5:33-37)
3.) How did Gamaliel's theory work out, by the way?
February 10, 2012
Day 35 - Acts 4
Last night's post generated some discussion about baptism that I wanted to share. I posted on Facebook that baptism was no longer a requirement according to Acts 3. In response, I was asked by an old friend, "Requirement for what, salvation or joining the church?"
This is a very good question. It made me realize that I wasn't quite thorough enough in my study or specific enough in the question I posed after. In Acts 2, its easy to miss whether Peter is saying that baptism is required for salvation or for church "membership" (for lack of a better word). In Acts 3 Peter doesn't even mention baptism in his preaching, so what gives?
Acts 4 (Read it here)
As Peter and John were teaching, the captain of the temple guard was asked by the priests and some Sadducees to arrest them for teaching that "through Jesus there is a resurrection of the dead." (v. 2)
The Sadducees didn't even believe in a resurrection of the dead. The priests refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah. They felt that Peter and John were committing blasphemy (lying about or sharing something untrue about God) by teaching such a doctrine.
It didn't stop most of those who heard Peter's message in Acts 3 from repenting and believing in Jesus. The total number of believers probably ranged from 8-15 thousand, if you counted the women and children! But if you did the math from Acts 2 to now (Acts 4) you would see that as many as 2,000 became believers after Peter's second message!
The next day Peter and John were brought before the entire council, which included all the rulers, elders, teachers of religious law, the high priest, other priests and even the high priest's family! (vs. 5-6) Peter and John were considered very dangerous to the establishment so no religious leader was left out of this meeting! Caiaphas, the high priest who led the plot to kill Jesus, was also there!
This could have very well been the day of Peter and John's execution. With all the prominent leaders in this meeting, Peter and John would have been well within expectations to fear for their lives!
The questioning begins in verse 7, “By what power, or in whose name, have you done this?”
This question had the most obvious answer, a complete a no-brainer.
Pause.
Jesus told the disciples that there would come a time like this. A time when they would be surrounded by opposition, in a trial, where answers will be crucial and tensions will be high. Jesus had said, "don't worry when this happens. I will give you the right words to speak so your opponents won't be able to reply or refute you." (See Luke 21:12-15 for a refresher)
So let's see if this pans out like Jesus said it would. Remember Peter backed off last time when three random people asked if he even KNEW Jesus. This time it is he that is in front of the firing squad.
Play.
Peter steps up, to say the least. Luke makes it clear that Peter is "filled with the Holy Spirit." (v. 8) Peter is slightly sarcastic in asking if they are being charged for healing a crippled man. The real question they want to know, as Peter suggests, is "what is the source of the power that allowed them to do it?" (v. 9)
Peter doesn't even allow the council to confirm if that is indeed the question, he just answers his own question with superior boldness. He was healed by the power that's in the name of Jesus Christ, the man they crucified (this accusatory tone has proven effective recently) but whom God raised from the dead!
He even quotes the same Scripture Jesus did when the religious leaders had rejected him earlier in verse 11. As we noted earlier, Jesus is the foundation of all things; everything rests and depends on him (remember the post regarding the cornerstone and capstone? If not, check in this post), whether they want to believe it or not!
Jesus is the only way to be reconciled to God. Peter states it clearly to these religious leaders in verse 12. There is no other name or Messiah to wait for! Jesus is it!
The council is befuddled! How do these uneducated guys talk with so much authority (people thought the same thing about Jesus, too)? That's the power of the Spirit at work, ladies and gentlemen. The Spirit can use anyone, no matter how little education or public speaking experience one has, to humble the arrogant ones who think they have all the answers.
The healed man stood beside Peter and John as proof. The council is speechless. I guess that's good enough to prove that Jesus was right. The council removed Peter and John so they could strategize what to do with these apostles of Jesus. (v. 15) They couldn't deny the fact that the man had been healed but they couldn't allow this teaching to continue, either. (vs. 16-17)
The council decided to warn the apostles not to speak of Jesus again. (v. 19) Peter scoffs at the notion that he would be dumb enough to obey them rather than God. They flatly tell the council that they won't stop. (v. 20)
More threats came their way but ultimately they were released. The crowd was praising God because this crippled man had suffered for more than 40 years! (v. 22) How can someone who heals and releases a man from such agony be punished?
It was this reaction from the crowd that stopped the council from doing anything to the apostles.
Peter and John got the believers together and gave them the scoop about what had happened with the council. All the believers knew that the religious leaders would be keeping an eye out for anything related to Jesus, so they decided to pray together for courage. They would need it because more threats were to come and some would receive more than threats.
The believers know that the religious establishment was willing to use violence to suppress this Christian movement. Opposition is building from all sides, not just from the Romans, but also from the Jews and Gentiles alike! (v. 27)
The believers prayed for boldness and for miracles to continue to occur. (vs. 29-30) Just like in the upper room, the Holy Spirit fell upon the group. This time Luke says the place shook. Their prayer had been heard. They continued to preach with no fear.
Just so you know, these believers are not necessarily synonymous with all the people who heard Peter and John teach earlier outside the temple. Perhaps some of those who came to faith also partook in this meeting, though. This time of prayer was most likely removed from the temple courtyard and back within the fledgling Christian community.
Luke reminds the readers that within this community there was unity, complete sharing and a lack of poverty. People would literally bring money to the apostles so that it could be distributed to those in need. (v. 35) Barnabas was a good example of a rich man who sold possessions to support the needy. (vs. 36-37).
We'll definitely see the name Barnabas much more in the book of Acts.
Questions
1.) How would you react if you were arrested or publicly ridiculed for serving someone in need and sharing your faith? Would you heed the warning or change your behavior? What is the downfall if we were to stop serving and sharing our faith?
2.) Do you truly believe that God can use anyone to reach others for the gospel no matter how educated, wealthy or eloquent they are? Can't He use you? Why or why not?
3.) What would it be like to live or be part of a community in which no one was ever in need? If you could be assured of such a community, would you be willing to share everything you have for the sake of others? What stops you from doing that now?
This is a very good question. It made me realize that I wasn't quite thorough enough in my study or specific enough in the question I posed after. In Acts 2, its easy to miss whether Peter is saying that baptism is required for salvation or for church "membership" (for lack of a better word). In Acts 3 Peter doesn't even mention baptism in his preaching, so what gives?
In Acts 2:38, the Greek word baptizo is strictly defined as an initiation or religious ceremony of immersing the whole body in water to signify purification. (The keywords initiation and religious ceremony are indicators that this is a physical act, not a spiritual transaction, if you will.). At the conclusion of Acts 2, Luke does mention that 3,000 joined the church. It is sensible to put two and two together (baptism in this case is related to pledging their faith in Christ before joining the church).
In Acts 3, Peter isn't in the presence of the church community and Luke doesn't mention the church community's interaction with one another, which is most likely why the invitation to the religious ceremony of baptism was omitted. I hope that makes sense. Thanks for the insight Brandon!
Acts 4 (Read it here)
As Peter and John were teaching, the captain of the temple guard was asked by the priests and some Sadducees to arrest them for teaching that "through Jesus there is a resurrection of the dead." (v. 2)
The Sadducees didn't even believe in a resurrection of the dead. The priests refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah. They felt that Peter and John were committing blasphemy (lying about or sharing something untrue about God) by teaching such a doctrine.
It didn't stop most of those who heard Peter's message in Acts 3 from repenting and believing in Jesus. The total number of believers probably ranged from 8-15 thousand, if you counted the women and children! But if you did the math from Acts 2 to now (Acts 4) you would see that as many as 2,000 became believers after Peter's second message!
The next day Peter and John were brought before the entire council, which included all the rulers, elders, teachers of religious law, the high priest, other priests and even the high priest's family! (vs. 5-6) Peter and John were considered very dangerous to the establishment so no religious leader was left out of this meeting! Caiaphas, the high priest who led the plot to kill Jesus, was also there!
This could have very well been the day of Peter and John's execution. With all the prominent leaders in this meeting, Peter and John would have been well within expectations to fear for their lives!
The questioning begins in verse 7, “By what power, or in whose name, have you done this?”
This question had the most obvious answer, a complete a no-brainer.
Pause.
Jesus told the disciples that there would come a time like this. A time when they would be surrounded by opposition, in a trial, where answers will be crucial and tensions will be high. Jesus had said, "don't worry when this happens. I will give you the right words to speak so your opponents won't be able to reply or refute you." (See Luke 21:12-15 for a refresher)
So let's see if this pans out like Jesus said it would. Remember Peter backed off last time when three random people asked if he even KNEW Jesus. This time it is he that is in front of the firing squad.
Play.
Peter steps up, to say the least. Luke makes it clear that Peter is "filled with the Holy Spirit." (v. 8) Peter is slightly sarcastic in asking if they are being charged for healing a crippled man. The real question they want to know, as Peter suggests, is "what is the source of the power that allowed them to do it?" (v. 9)
Peter doesn't even allow the council to confirm if that is indeed the question, he just answers his own question with superior boldness. He was healed by the power that's in the name of Jesus Christ, the man they crucified (this accusatory tone has proven effective recently) but whom God raised from the dead!
He even quotes the same Scripture Jesus did when the religious leaders had rejected him earlier in verse 11. As we noted earlier, Jesus is the foundation of all things; everything rests and depends on him (remember the post regarding the cornerstone and capstone? If not, check in this post), whether they want to believe it or not!
Jesus is the only way to be reconciled to God. Peter states it clearly to these religious leaders in verse 12. There is no other name or Messiah to wait for! Jesus is it!
The council is befuddled! How do these uneducated guys talk with so much authority (people thought the same thing about Jesus, too)? That's the power of the Spirit at work, ladies and gentlemen. The Spirit can use anyone, no matter how little education or public speaking experience one has, to humble the arrogant ones who think they have all the answers.
The healed man stood beside Peter and John as proof. The council is speechless. I guess that's good enough to prove that Jesus was right. The council removed Peter and John so they could strategize what to do with these apostles of Jesus. (v. 15) They couldn't deny the fact that the man had been healed but they couldn't allow this teaching to continue, either. (vs. 16-17)
The council decided to warn the apostles not to speak of Jesus again. (v. 19) Peter scoffs at the notion that he would be dumb enough to obey them rather than God. They flatly tell the council that they won't stop. (v. 20)
More threats came their way but ultimately they were released. The crowd was praising God because this crippled man had suffered for more than 40 years! (v. 22) How can someone who heals and releases a man from such agony be punished?
It was this reaction from the crowd that stopped the council from doing anything to the apostles.
Peter and John got the believers together and gave them the scoop about what had happened with the council. All the believers knew that the religious leaders would be keeping an eye out for anything related to Jesus, so they decided to pray together for courage. They would need it because more threats were to come and some would receive more than threats.
The believers know that the religious establishment was willing to use violence to suppress this Christian movement. Opposition is building from all sides, not just from the Romans, but also from the Jews and Gentiles alike! (v. 27)
The believers prayed for boldness and for miracles to continue to occur. (vs. 29-30) Just like in the upper room, the Holy Spirit fell upon the group. This time Luke says the place shook. Their prayer had been heard. They continued to preach with no fear.
Just so you know, these believers are not necessarily synonymous with all the people who heard Peter and John teach earlier outside the temple. Perhaps some of those who came to faith also partook in this meeting, though. This time of prayer was most likely removed from the temple courtyard and back within the fledgling Christian community.
Luke reminds the readers that within this community there was unity, complete sharing and a lack of poverty. People would literally bring money to the apostles so that it could be distributed to those in need. (v. 35) Barnabas was a good example of a rich man who sold possessions to support the needy. (vs. 36-37).
We'll definitely see the name Barnabas much more in the book of Acts.
Questions
1.) How would you react if you were arrested or publicly ridiculed for serving someone in need and sharing your faith? Would you heed the warning or change your behavior? What is the downfall if we were to stop serving and sharing our faith?
2.) Do you truly believe that God can use anyone to reach others for the gospel no matter how educated, wealthy or eloquent they are? Can't He use you? Why or why not?
3.) What would it be like to live or be part of a community in which no one was ever in need? If you could be assured of such a community, would you be willing to share everything you have for the sake of others? What stops you from doing that now?
February 9, 2012
Day 34 - Acts 3
Today I just registered and purchased the new permanent web address for CDM and it will be dodgemonotony.com! Ok, the only real difference is that blogspot won't be in the address anymore (which will sure make it easier to say, right?).
Let's get to Acts 3...
Acts 3 (Read it here)
Peter and John go to the temple for a prayer service when they see a disabled man being carried in and dropped off beside the 'Beautiful Gate.' (vs. 1-2) Many scholars believe that this gate was further from the outer walls of the temple, meaning that only wealthy or prominent leaders within society would pass him by. Since Peter and John were quite influential, they walked right past this man. He, of course, asked them for money. (v. 3)
Peter called out to the man. The man was excited, thinking that a donation was coming his way. Just as Jesus had instructed these men previously, they didn't carry money, extra clothes or a walking stick, so gold and silver was out of the question.
Peter is moved with compassion (just as Jesus had been many times before) and confidently told the man to "get up and walk." (v. 6) The man's disability was undoubtedly the reason why he was forced to beg in the first place. Peter gives the man back control over his body and, in many ways, his life back.
There are two clues in verses 8 & 11 that lead me to believe that the Beautiful Gate was not the entrance for prominent leaders within society. First of all, the now-healed man accompanies Peter and John to where they were going. A poor beggar is not a wealthy, influential leader. And second of all, Solomon's Colonnade (also known as Solomon's Porch) was located in the Gentile courtyard (or outer courtyard) of the temple. Only Jews were allowed entrance to the actual temple. However, this doesn't mean that only Gentiles were present in this courtyard, Jews would have to go through the Gentile courtyard anyway to enter the temple.
Want to see what I'm talking about? Check out this map.
Just like in Acts 2, this miracle gets everyones attention. It also helps that the man is jumping around, singing praises to God, causing a commotion. Everyone noticed that this was the same disabled man who had always asked for their spare change.
Peter takes advantage of this opportunity, as he did in Acts 2.
All throughout Luke we saw Jesus humiliating the Pharisees and religious leaders for their pompous attitude, arrogance and fake piety. So Peter knows fair well not to elevate himself but give due credit to God for the miracle that had just happened.
As Jesus said, being humble will cause others to elevate you. (See Luke 14:11 to get a refresher)
This miracle was performed by God to give glory to Jesus, "the same Jesus whom you handed over and rejected before Pilate, despite Pilate's decision to release him." (v. 13) This statement had to have a particular sting to it when it was received by any Jew. Its like saying, "this Roman knew better than you did!" And trust me, Jews did not like Romans.
(Paraphrasing) You picked a murderer (Barabbas) over the author of life (Jesus)! But God raised Jesus from the dead and there's no denying it. (v. 14-15)
The man was healed not because Peter uttered Jesus' name like a magic spell, but because the disabled man had adequate faith to believe that he could be healed. His faith in Jesus healed him! (v. 16)
I love the way Peter empathizes with the crowd when he says, "I realize what you and your leaders did to Jesus was done in ignorance." (v. 17) He can empathize because he himself denied Jesus and fled the scene was the heat got too hot. Peter protected his own backside when he thought he could suffer, too. In many ways, Peter has no room to blame anyone for denying Jesus. But he's making up for it by devoting his life to the ministry wholeheartedly. (I say this not just because Peter proclaims the gospel until he dies but because he is also later executed by being crucified. However, Peter is said to have requested to be hung upside down because he wasn't worthy to be killed the same way his Lord was. Wow.)
Peter simply asks for them to "repent of your sins and turn to God." (v. 19) This must be the central requirement of salvation. Notice that baptism is NOT mentioned here as it was in Acts 2. Why? Simply because the ritual of washing the body could never actually clean the inside of a person. Baptism is and always will be an outward symbol of an inner change and conscious decision to follow Christ.
Verse 20 is most interesting to me. The "times of refreshment" seems to speak of the peace that one receives from being released from the burden of sin (as in what some call 'making peace with God'). Send you Jesus, at the end of verse 20, is not a spiritual sending of Jesus to live in your heart or soul, as many Americans describe receiving Jesus (ask Jesus into your heart). It refers to how God will send Jesus at the end of days to come for those that belong to Him. That will be the Jesus that will be sent to them!
Peter uses probably the two biggest names in all of Israelite history to back up his argument here: Moses and Abraham. Moses was a savior in his own right. God used him to bring his people out of slavery in Egypt. Even Moses pointed to this capital p-Prophet, Jesus. (v. 22) Those who don't follow Jesus, will not be rescued by God, they will be cut off. (v. 23)
Everyone here, either Jewish or Gentile, has a connection to Abraham. It is traditionally thought that Ishmael (Abraham's son through his wife's servant) was the father of the Gentiles and Isaac (Abraham's miracle son with his wife Sarah) continued the line of the Jewish people. So, everyone is blessed through Abraham. (v. 25)
The purpose of raising Jesus from the dead was not to belittle all who denied him but to bless them by giving them a way out of their sins. Just as Abraham was a blessing to both Gentiles and Jews, Jesus is now the ultimate blessing who leads all of humankind back to God. That is, if they choose so.
Questions
1.) Peter had to empathize with his audience because he was also guilty of denying Christ (three times, actually). Have you ever done something to make you feel unworthy to be a Christ-follower only to be put in a situation later where you have to call out someone else's poor decision, attitude, lifestyle? How did you feel? Did you go through with it?
2.) In Acts 2 Peter gives two requirements for being a Christ-follower (repent and be baptized). Here in Acts 3, he only says repent. Baptism is not mentioned. Do you believe that someone has to be baptized to be saved? If not, how important do you think it is to be baptized at all?
3.) Basically, everyone in the world is blessed through Abraham. However, we ultimately have the choice of choosing Jesus, the ultimate blessing to this world, as being 'connected' to us. Have you reached out to Christ to be connected with him? If not, what's stopping you?
Let's get to Acts 3...
Acts 3 (Read it here)
Peter and John go to the temple for a prayer service when they see a disabled man being carried in and dropped off beside the 'Beautiful Gate.' (vs. 1-2) Many scholars believe that this gate was further from the outer walls of the temple, meaning that only wealthy or prominent leaders within society would pass him by. Since Peter and John were quite influential, they walked right past this man. He, of course, asked them for money. (v. 3)
Peter called out to the man. The man was excited, thinking that a donation was coming his way. Just as Jesus had instructed these men previously, they didn't carry money, extra clothes or a walking stick, so gold and silver was out of the question.
Peter is moved with compassion (just as Jesus had been many times before) and confidently told the man to "get up and walk." (v. 6) The man's disability was undoubtedly the reason why he was forced to beg in the first place. Peter gives the man back control over his body and, in many ways, his life back.
There are two clues in verses 8 & 11 that lead me to believe that the Beautiful Gate was not the entrance for prominent leaders within society. First of all, the now-healed man accompanies Peter and John to where they were going. A poor beggar is not a wealthy, influential leader. And second of all, Solomon's Colonnade (also known as Solomon's Porch) was located in the Gentile courtyard (or outer courtyard) of the temple. Only Jews were allowed entrance to the actual temple. However, this doesn't mean that only Gentiles were present in this courtyard, Jews would have to go through the Gentile courtyard anyway to enter the temple.
Want to see what I'm talking about? Check out this map.
Just like in Acts 2, this miracle gets everyones attention. It also helps that the man is jumping around, singing praises to God, causing a commotion. Everyone noticed that this was the same disabled man who had always asked for their spare change.
Peter takes advantage of this opportunity, as he did in Acts 2.
All throughout Luke we saw Jesus humiliating the Pharisees and religious leaders for their pompous attitude, arrogance and fake piety. So Peter knows fair well not to elevate himself but give due credit to God for the miracle that had just happened.
As Jesus said, being humble will cause others to elevate you. (See Luke 14:11 to get a refresher)
This miracle was performed by God to give glory to Jesus, "the same Jesus whom you handed over and rejected before Pilate, despite Pilate's decision to release him." (v. 13) This statement had to have a particular sting to it when it was received by any Jew. Its like saying, "this Roman knew better than you did!" And trust me, Jews did not like Romans.
(Paraphrasing) You picked a murderer (Barabbas) over the author of life (Jesus)! But God raised Jesus from the dead and there's no denying it. (v. 14-15)
The man was healed not because Peter uttered Jesus' name like a magic spell, but because the disabled man had adequate faith to believe that he could be healed. His faith in Jesus healed him! (v. 16)
I love the way Peter empathizes with the crowd when he says, "I realize what you and your leaders did to Jesus was done in ignorance." (v. 17) He can empathize because he himself denied Jesus and fled the scene was the heat got too hot. Peter protected his own backside when he thought he could suffer, too. In many ways, Peter has no room to blame anyone for denying Jesus. But he's making up for it by devoting his life to the ministry wholeheartedly. (I say this not just because Peter proclaims the gospel until he dies but because he is also later executed by being crucified. However, Peter is said to have requested to be hung upside down because he wasn't worthy to be killed the same way his Lord was. Wow.)
Peter simply asks for them to "repent of your sins and turn to God." (v. 19) This must be the central requirement of salvation. Notice that baptism is NOT mentioned here as it was in Acts 2. Why? Simply because the ritual of washing the body could never actually clean the inside of a person. Baptism is and always will be an outward symbol of an inner change and conscious decision to follow Christ.
Verse 20 is most interesting to me. The "times of refreshment" seems to speak of the peace that one receives from being released from the burden of sin (as in what some call 'making peace with God'). Send you Jesus, at the end of verse 20, is not a spiritual sending of Jesus to live in your heart or soul, as many Americans describe receiving Jesus (ask Jesus into your heart). It refers to how God will send Jesus at the end of days to come for those that belong to Him. That will be the Jesus that will be sent to them!
Peter uses probably the two biggest names in all of Israelite history to back up his argument here: Moses and Abraham. Moses was a savior in his own right. God used him to bring his people out of slavery in Egypt. Even Moses pointed to this capital p-Prophet, Jesus. (v. 22) Those who don't follow Jesus, will not be rescued by God, they will be cut off. (v. 23)
Everyone here, either Jewish or Gentile, has a connection to Abraham. It is traditionally thought that Ishmael (Abraham's son through his wife's servant) was the father of the Gentiles and Isaac (Abraham's miracle son with his wife Sarah) continued the line of the Jewish people. So, everyone is blessed through Abraham. (v. 25)
The purpose of raising Jesus from the dead was not to belittle all who denied him but to bless them by giving them a way out of their sins. Just as Abraham was a blessing to both Gentiles and Jews, Jesus is now the ultimate blessing who leads all of humankind back to God. That is, if they choose so.
Questions
1.) Peter had to empathize with his audience because he was also guilty of denying Christ (three times, actually). Have you ever done something to make you feel unworthy to be a Christ-follower only to be put in a situation later where you have to call out someone else's poor decision, attitude, lifestyle? How did you feel? Did you go through with it?
2.) In Acts 2 Peter gives two requirements for being a Christ-follower (repent and be baptized). Here in Acts 3, he only says repent. Baptism is not mentioned. Do you believe that someone has to be baptized to be saved? If not, how important do you think it is to be baptized at all?
3.) Basically, everyone in the world is blessed through Abraham. However, we ultimately have the choice of choosing Jesus, the ultimate blessing to this world, as being 'connected' to us. Have you reached out to Christ to be connected with him? If not, what's stopping you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)