vs 31
Seen by his disciples is what Paul is saying. This is a criticism of the resurrection account, that Jesus only appeared to his disciples. The term 'collective hallucination' gets bandied about.
Paul, however, sees these eye witnesses as key to the body of evidence that makes his teaching reliable - to 'our people', the Jews.
vs 32-33
I wonder if this is the first instance of the term 'good news'? It's not new news, it's very old news apparently. But the news is that God has fulfilled his promises of old completely in Jesus Christ, because Jesus comes as the Son of God. So Jesus' sonship, you can see here, is very important.
vs 34
This is a pretty full on sermon here. The OT is coming out left, right and centre. This first verse from Isaiah is to ensure that the concept of blessings from the Davidic covenant are supposed to flow on past David to the messiah.
vs 35
And this verse is to back up Paul's idea that the messiah is resurrected so as not to see decay, but to be alive forever.
vs 36-37
Paul is seeking to show that even David died, and so the messiah must be greater than David. Jesus did this too, while he was alive. It's hard to convince a bunch of jews that there is someone who is better than Moses, David and Elijah. It's not everyday that someone would say something like that.
But Jesus' greatness and superiority to David in particular, because we're talking about the covenant made to him, is assured in his resurrection.
vs 38
Ok, now that is a bit of a leap. I think there might be some padding of understanding of the Davidic covenantal promise between vs 37 and 38 that Paul is assuming.
vs 39
Stick it to the law! It's not that the Law itself did not provide justification. But it did not provide this justification which allows you to be set free from sin. The idea that a regular sacrifice need not be made is a revolutionary one in the history of religion. It is still a revolutionary idea for many tribal people groups.
vs 40-41
Wow, that piece of Scripture was written purely for the occasion, wasn't it? I don't think we can always expect God to be doing incredible things we won't believe, but we have to be prepared for the fact that he might. That is none more obvious than in the coming of Christ - a supremely incredible feat, and not something you would have seen coming really.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Acts chapter 13
vs 21
And if that's all you say about him, then you're being nice really.
vs 22
And although that isn't exactly true, it is again quite charitable. It's not a quote, by the way - the Bible doesn't have God saying that anywhere. Except here. So Paul in his speech is really speaking on God's behalf, putting words in God's mouth. Now, he's not putting any words God didn't say in his mouth, except perhaps "He will do everything I want him to do".
vs 23
There's a convenient jump which dodges a thousand years of history. So Paul is drawing a line to God's promises to David primarily. Worth remembering.
vs 24
John the Baptist again! This guy was a star! Paul is talking about him to people in Pisidian Antioch for crying out loud!
vs 25
John TB is the first person in this story to get a speaking role. So while the ancient history is there, the modern history is focused on more. John's words here are critical in showing that he wasn't the messiah.
vs 26
It is Paul's firm belief that the message of salvation from God comes to God's people primarily. And so hence when he gets to Pisidian Antioch, that's who the message is for.
vs 27
So Paul is saying it was inevitable that this tragedy was going to befall Israel (that she didn't recognise her saviour). It's a good thing to say - it's like saying "This had to happen, but now that it has happened, there's no reason you can't accept him now".
vs 28
That's pretty regrettable. Paul is obviously following in the line of Peter's preaching here, making sure people understand that they had a communal hand in Jesus' death.
vs 29
It's almost as if the OT was a handbook for preparing the suffering of the messiah. But in that Paul is also showing that Jesus did meet all the prophetic messages about the messiah.
vs 30
Pretty matter of fact statement there. You can't bury what God won't keep dead. Well, you can, but it's not worth the trouble.
And if that's all you say about him, then you're being nice really.
vs 22
And although that isn't exactly true, it is again quite charitable. It's not a quote, by the way - the Bible doesn't have God saying that anywhere. Except here. So Paul in his speech is really speaking on God's behalf, putting words in God's mouth. Now, he's not putting any words God didn't say in his mouth, except perhaps "He will do everything I want him to do".
vs 23
There's a convenient jump which dodges a thousand years of history. So Paul is drawing a line to God's promises to David primarily. Worth remembering.
vs 24
John the Baptist again! This guy was a star! Paul is talking about him to people in Pisidian Antioch for crying out loud!
vs 25
John TB is the first person in this story to get a speaking role. So while the ancient history is there, the modern history is focused on more. John's words here are critical in showing that he wasn't the messiah.
vs 26
It is Paul's firm belief that the message of salvation from God comes to God's people primarily. And so hence when he gets to Pisidian Antioch, that's who the message is for.
vs 27
So Paul is saying it was inevitable that this tragedy was going to befall Israel (that she didn't recognise her saviour). It's a good thing to say - it's like saying "This had to happen, but now that it has happened, there's no reason you can't accept him now".
vs 28
That's pretty regrettable. Paul is obviously following in the line of Peter's preaching here, making sure people understand that they had a communal hand in Jesus' death.
vs 29
It's almost as if the OT was a handbook for preparing the suffering of the messiah. But in that Paul is also showing that Jesus did meet all the prophetic messages about the messiah.
vs 30
Pretty matter of fact statement there. You can't bury what God won't keep dead. Well, you can, but it's not worth the trouble.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Acts chapter 13
Isn't it funny how easy it is to drop a habit after just a day or two of not doing it?
vs 11
Woah. I mean, that is just totally mega. This is not something anyone would ever do today. This is the second curse to be called down on someone in the name of God. Peter cursed Simon the sorcerer, remember? We simply do not do this stuff. Is that because it doesn't fit us culturally? Or because we don't feel we're allowed?
vs 12
This verse is worded very interestingly. It involves both seeing the reality and power of Christ in blinding the magician, but also being amazed at the teaching of the belief as well. Interesting combination. But the way it says it almost suggests he believed once he had seen the power, because of the teaching.
vs 13
Bit of a travel update. Interesting that we hear nothing more of the proconsul. Paul and Barnabas did their work, and moved on. John Mark also left them at this time, who knows why.
vs 14
As you would, I assume. Notice the unity that existed - Pisidian Antioch had 1 synagogue. Now I am sure that wasn't because of a deeply felt unity among the Jews. I bet it was because the government allowed only 1 synagogue, and so you either went there or went nowhere. Could do wonders for Christianity.
vs 15
A bit like an old school Brethren church - having visitors speak. Although in Brethren churches they waited for the Spirit to convict you! Even in synangoges the leaders just asked you.
vs 16
This verse alone tells us that some gentiles worshipped in synagogues. Probably as proselytes. I love "motioned with his hand". We're not given any idea of what he motioned. It just brings to mind the broad, sweeping motion of one beginning an oratory.
vs 17
Wow. That was a hugely simplified summary. Awesome. We just went from Genesis through Exodus in 1 verse.
vs 18
This takes us right through to Deuteronomy.
vs 19
Joshua.
vs 20
450 years in three verses, then Judges covered in this one verse. But you can see, both here and in earlier speeches given in Acts the need for historical summaries. The jews were never keen on forgetting their history. We love forgetting ours. Can you imagine trying to fit 2000 years of Christian history into the beginning of every sermon? I might try starting to do that, just in my next few sermons. And obviously going very quickly - 3 sentences per 450 years.
vs 11
Woah. I mean, that is just totally mega. This is not something anyone would ever do today. This is the second curse to be called down on someone in the name of God. Peter cursed Simon the sorcerer, remember? We simply do not do this stuff. Is that because it doesn't fit us culturally? Or because we don't feel we're allowed?
vs 12
This verse is worded very interestingly. It involves both seeing the reality and power of Christ in blinding the magician, but also being amazed at the teaching of the belief as well. Interesting combination. But the way it says it almost suggests he believed once he had seen the power, because of the teaching.
vs 13
Bit of a travel update. Interesting that we hear nothing more of the proconsul. Paul and Barnabas did their work, and moved on. John Mark also left them at this time, who knows why.
vs 14
As you would, I assume. Notice the unity that existed - Pisidian Antioch had 1 synagogue. Now I am sure that wasn't because of a deeply felt unity among the Jews. I bet it was because the government allowed only 1 synagogue, and so you either went there or went nowhere. Could do wonders for Christianity.
vs 15
A bit like an old school Brethren church - having visitors speak. Although in Brethren churches they waited for the Spirit to convict you! Even in synangoges the leaders just asked you.
vs 16
This verse alone tells us that some gentiles worshipped in synagogues. Probably as proselytes. I love "motioned with his hand". We're not given any idea of what he motioned. It just brings to mind the broad, sweeping motion of one beginning an oratory.
vs 17
Wow. That was a hugely simplified summary. Awesome. We just went from Genesis through Exodus in 1 verse.
vs 18
This takes us right through to Deuteronomy.
vs 19
Joshua.
vs 20
450 years in three verses, then Judges covered in this one verse. But you can see, both here and in earlier speeches given in Acts the need for historical summaries. The jews were never keen on forgetting their history. We love forgetting ours. Can you imagine trying to fit 2000 years of Christian history into the beginning of every sermon? I might try starting to do that, just in my next few sermons. And obviously going very quickly - 3 sentences per 450 years.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Acts chapter 13
vs 1
A pretty interesting bunch of people if you ask me. They had come from lots of foreign parts, for one. Manean you would assume was fairly influential if he grew up with Herod (it's a stratafied society, remember). Simeon may or may not have been from Antioch, and if he wasn't, then we see a startling thing - that none of the leaders of the church are from the area.
vs 2
How did it say this, exactly? It isn't explained. We are meant to just know what it means. Well, apart from what that one bit means, we do know what the rest of this verse means - that Barnabas and Saul are set apart for a specific work.
vs 3
Can't argue with the Holy Spirit. Mission agencies and modern missiologists make a lot of the fact that while Barnabas and Saul were part of the calling, so were the rest of the leadership of the church.
I personally think that's important, but other people disagree.
vs 4
Again, in steps the Holy Spirit and they somehow end up in Cyprus. What is happening here? Who knows.
vs 5
John I assume means John Mark. It's weird people having different names. Apparently they didn't know that they were being called to be missionaries to the gentiles, because they spent all their time with Jews.
vs 6
You mean the jewish guy was a sorcerer and a false prophet? Surely the jews never did anything like that! :P
vs 7
Sergius sounds like a fairly alright man. We have to remember, though, that Christianity was a totally new thing, and also that people giving public speeches about things like religion was pretty much the equivalent of TV back in those days.
vs 8
Of course that's what it means...
Regardless, he was trying to stop the proconsul from hearing about Christianity. What faith did he want him to have? Probably faith in his sorcery, so that he kept his job.
vs 9
Oooh, you know when it says "filled with the Holy Spirit" there's going to be some smackdown. This is also the first verse where Saul is also called Paul. Note that, unlike the way some preachers put it, it was not a name change that came about because of his conversion. It's just a different name that he also used.
vs 10
Wow, Paul ripped him a new one! I guess Paul was angry not only because the guy was perverting judaism by being a sorcerer, but also trying to pervert Christianity by speaking against it. Sometimes you've just got to tell people they are spiritual excrement.
A pretty interesting bunch of people if you ask me. They had come from lots of foreign parts, for one. Manean you would assume was fairly influential if he grew up with Herod (it's a stratafied society, remember). Simeon may or may not have been from Antioch, and if he wasn't, then we see a startling thing - that none of the leaders of the church are from the area.
vs 2
How did it say this, exactly? It isn't explained. We are meant to just know what it means. Well, apart from what that one bit means, we do know what the rest of this verse means - that Barnabas and Saul are set apart for a specific work.
vs 3
Can't argue with the Holy Spirit. Mission agencies and modern missiologists make a lot of the fact that while Barnabas and Saul were part of the calling, so were the rest of the leadership of the church.
I personally think that's important, but other people disagree.
vs 4
Again, in steps the Holy Spirit and they somehow end up in Cyprus. What is happening here? Who knows.
vs 5
John I assume means John Mark. It's weird people having different names. Apparently they didn't know that they were being called to be missionaries to the gentiles, because they spent all their time with Jews.
vs 6
You mean the jewish guy was a sorcerer and a false prophet? Surely the jews never did anything like that! :P
vs 7
Sergius sounds like a fairly alright man. We have to remember, though, that Christianity was a totally new thing, and also that people giving public speeches about things like religion was pretty much the equivalent of TV back in those days.
vs 8
Of course that's what it means...
Regardless, he was trying to stop the proconsul from hearing about Christianity. What faith did he want him to have? Probably faith in his sorcery, so that he kept his job.
vs 9
Oooh, you know when it says "filled with the Holy Spirit" there's going to be some smackdown. This is also the first verse where Saul is also called Paul. Note that, unlike the way some preachers put it, it was not a name change that came about because of his conversion. It's just a different name that he also used.
vs 10
Wow, Paul ripped him a new one! I guess Paul was angry not only because the guy was perverting judaism by being a sorcerer, but also trying to pervert Christianity by speaking against it. Sometimes you've just got to tell people they are spiritual excrement.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Acts chapter 12
vs 21
Oooh, look at Mr Important!
vs 22
Uh oh. Got to be careful when people start saying things like that. God might take umbrage.
vs 23
Umbrage.
Who says there's no striking down deaths by God in the NT?
vs 24
Here is another one of those summary verses. Placed here, it provides a good foil to the recent stories about persecution - those that were persecuting the Christians, like Herod, died. But the church, despite its sufferings, continued in its growth.
vs 25
Remember, they were going on a trip to take some mercy mission money to Jerusalem. And now, they're taking John Mark - the same guy who Peter visited when he got out of jail.
Oooh, look at Mr Important!
vs 22
Uh oh. Got to be careful when people start saying things like that. God might take umbrage.
vs 23
Umbrage.
Who says there's no striking down deaths by God in the NT?
vs 24
Here is another one of those summary verses. Placed here, it provides a good foil to the recent stories about persecution - those that were persecuting the Christians, like Herod, died. But the church, despite its sufferings, continued in its growth.
vs 25
Remember, they were going on a trip to take some mercy mission money to Jerusalem. And now, they're taking John Mark - the same guy who Peter visited when he got out of jail.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Acts chapter 12
vs 11
... as opposed to it being a vision, I assume.
vs 12
Is that the John Mark I wonder? I suppose that it is. An interesting choice. There is a tradition that Mark is the one who writes the gospel of Peter, so perhaps they were friends as far back as this?
vs 13
As servants should.
vs 14
Hehehe, oops.
You've got to ask - why does Luke include this story? What's is theological or narrative significance? It doesn't really have any, does it? It's just funny.
vs 15
Now there's a cultural difference for you - they think it's more likely to be an angel than it is to be him freed from prison. What does 'his angel' mean exactly? And why would Peter's angel sound like Peter? Do people really have their own angels? Or perhaps it was just a human messenger they were expecting, as angel is the same word.
vs 16
Dammit, let me in! Of all the things they were expecting, they weren't expecting Peter to be at the door.
vs 17
He wasn't staying - he just wanted to pass on the good news.
vs 18
Oh look, a literary device! If we read this literalistically, then we read that there wasn't a commotion, which is of course unbelievable. "No small" is shared across the KJV, NASB, NIV and TNIV.
vs 19
Eep! Herod was pissed. We might think that this is a bit harsh, especially when Peter was freed by an angel, but guards and centurions and so on were expected not to fail in their work, and death was a common punishment for their failure.
Herod was so upset that he decided to go and have a holiday.
vs 20
Interesting little bit of history there really. It seems unecessary to go into such detail - perhaps it is something that interested Luke, or he's using it as a time measuring device so that we know where we are. It certainly shows its contemporariness - this sort of stuff was probably a whole lot more interesting to the people of the time.
... as opposed to it being a vision, I assume.
vs 12
Is that the John Mark I wonder? I suppose that it is. An interesting choice. There is a tradition that Mark is the one who writes the gospel of Peter, so perhaps they were friends as far back as this?
vs 13
As servants should.
vs 14
Hehehe, oops.
You've got to ask - why does Luke include this story? What's is theological or narrative significance? It doesn't really have any, does it? It's just funny.
vs 15
Now there's a cultural difference for you - they think it's more likely to be an angel than it is to be him freed from prison. What does 'his angel' mean exactly? And why would Peter's angel sound like Peter? Do people really have their own angels? Or perhaps it was just a human messenger they were expecting, as angel is the same word.
vs 16
Dammit, let me in! Of all the things they were expecting, they weren't expecting Peter to be at the door.
vs 17
He wasn't staying - he just wanted to pass on the good news.
vs 18
Oh look, a literary device! If we read this literalistically, then we read that there wasn't a commotion, which is of course unbelievable. "No small" is shared across the KJV, NASB, NIV and TNIV.
vs 19
Eep! Herod was pissed. We might think that this is a bit harsh, especially when Peter was freed by an angel, but guards and centurions and so on were expected not to fail in their work, and death was a common punishment for their failure.
Herod was so upset that he decided to go and have a holiday.
vs 20
Interesting little bit of history there really. It seems unecessary to go into such detail - perhaps it is something that interested Luke, or he's using it as a time measuring device so that we know where we are. It certainly shows its contemporariness - this sort of stuff was probably a whole lot more interesting to the people of the time.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Acts chapter 12
vs 1
Why? Doesn't say. Just because, apparently. Probably runs in the family to be a bastard.
vs 2
First apostle to die. So it's not like the 12 were somehow invincible just because they'd hung with Jesus. It's not also like they were indispensable, or else God would have kept them around.
Anyone who says that persecution of Christians didn't exist till under Nero can read this verse and suck it.
vs 3
Peter seems to be a bit of a kingpin at the moment, so of course he's the one you'd go for. It's not as if they were in hiding, either - they were out in the temple courts preaching.
vs 4
Afraid that the group of Christian widows might come and raid the prison to get him out? At least we get an idea of why Herod continued to persecute Christians, if not for why he started - political capital.
vs 5
They'll pray him out! Beat that, Herod!
vs 6
Wow, I mean, it's as if he's Hannibal Lecter or something. Remember, though, that these Christians have the rap as mighty prison breakers after they were arrested by the temple earlier in the story.
vs 7
Whack. Ow! Get up you moron, this is a spiritual prison break! Hard to imagine an angel kicking you awake.
vs 8
So you're guessing that the guards were not awakened by this whole cafuffle. Which again is totally weird. While we're talking about weirdness, let's consider this - God let James get killed without more than a verse of mention. Peter gets threatened, and not there's a breakout. That must have been totally humbling to be a disciple.
vs 9
So Peter was used to visions looking and feeling as though it were the real thing - or as surreal as being prison-breaked by angel gets anyway. That tells us something about visions. Peter's visions anyway.
vs 10
And Peter was left alone, a fugitive from the law, standing in the street, wondering what had just happened. Totally awesome.
Why? Doesn't say. Just because, apparently. Probably runs in the family to be a bastard.
vs 2
First apostle to die. So it's not like the 12 were somehow invincible just because they'd hung with Jesus. It's not also like they were indispensable, or else God would have kept them around.
Anyone who says that persecution of Christians didn't exist till under Nero can read this verse and suck it.
vs 3
Peter seems to be a bit of a kingpin at the moment, so of course he's the one you'd go for. It's not as if they were in hiding, either - they were out in the temple courts preaching.
vs 4
Afraid that the group of Christian widows might come and raid the prison to get him out? At least we get an idea of why Herod continued to persecute Christians, if not for why he started - political capital.
vs 5
They'll pray him out! Beat that, Herod!
vs 6
Wow, I mean, it's as if he's Hannibal Lecter or something. Remember, though, that these Christians have the rap as mighty prison breakers after they were arrested by the temple earlier in the story.
vs 7
Whack. Ow! Get up you moron, this is a spiritual prison break! Hard to imagine an angel kicking you awake.
vs 8
So you're guessing that the guards were not awakened by this whole cafuffle. Which again is totally weird. While we're talking about weirdness, let's consider this - God let James get killed without more than a verse of mention. Peter gets threatened, and not there's a breakout. That must have been totally humbling to be a disciple.
vs 9
So Peter was used to visions looking and feeling as though it were the real thing - or as surreal as being prison-breaked by angel gets anyway. That tells us something about visions. Peter's visions anyway.
vs 10
And Peter was left alone, a fugitive from the law, standing in the street, wondering what had just happened. Totally awesome.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Acts chapter 11
vs 21
The first thing I thought was "Awesome for them", because they are doing something completely different. I mean, reaching Jews with the message of their own messiah is one thing. Reaching gentiles with a message about a jewish messiah? Different.
Second thing I thought was, "Wouldn't it be cool to know what they were doing to be so successful?" But that's a worldly way of thinking. The Bible tells us why they were successful - because God was with them. That doesn't mean God isn't with you if your evangelism fails.
vs 22
He's pretty cool, so that was a good choice.
vs 23
Barnabas has obviously fully accepted Peter's story about gentiles coming to faith, because he doesn't bat an eyelid in Antioch.
vs 24
Through his encouragement (which was his gift, hence the name) people came to God! That must've been pretty ripe soil then - because when people usually come, it's through someone's ardent speaking or preaching or miracles or whatever. He probably did speak publically. But again, luke makes it clear that he was successful because he was a good man and full of the Holy Spirit.
vs 25
Which is where the Jerusalem group sent him. How long ago was that?
vs 26
Apparently, Barnabas was looking for a partner in crime. When he did find Paul, they absconded to Antioch and built the church up.
That they were called Christians doesn't necessarily mean it was done in an insulting way, but it could have been. What does seem clear is that they didn't come up with the term themselves.
vs 27
Now here's one for our modern times. Prophets come from Jerusalem. Unnamed prophets. What's their job? What do prophets do? We want to say that they speak the word of God to people. And we'd be right. But what do they do while in Antioch?
vs 28
Well, unnamed except for Agabus. His prophecy comes true, which is good - no need to stone him. But what did he do? Predicted the future! We've got to remember that although we like to say that prophecy is speaking the word of God in all tenses, that future tense isn't out of the question.
Luke even helpfully gives us the time period of the famine.
vs 29
Obviously Judea wasn't doing as well as Antioch. Possibly because they sold all their fields to give to widows and the poor.
vs 30
Barnabas and Saul had a lot more to do with the Jerusalem church than the Antiochans did. In fact, it could be that Barnabas and Saul suggested the gift in the first place.
The first thing I thought was "Awesome for them", because they are doing something completely different. I mean, reaching Jews with the message of their own messiah is one thing. Reaching gentiles with a message about a jewish messiah? Different.
Second thing I thought was, "Wouldn't it be cool to know what they were doing to be so successful?" But that's a worldly way of thinking. The Bible tells us why they were successful - because God was with them. That doesn't mean God isn't with you if your evangelism fails.
vs 22
He's pretty cool, so that was a good choice.
vs 23
Barnabas has obviously fully accepted Peter's story about gentiles coming to faith, because he doesn't bat an eyelid in Antioch.
vs 24
Through his encouragement (which was his gift, hence the name) people came to God! That must've been pretty ripe soil then - because when people usually come, it's through someone's ardent speaking or preaching or miracles or whatever. He probably did speak publically. But again, luke makes it clear that he was successful because he was a good man and full of the Holy Spirit.
vs 25
Which is where the Jerusalem group sent him. How long ago was that?
vs 26
Apparently, Barnabas was looking for a partner in crime. When he did find Paul, they absconded to Antioch and built the church up.
That they were called Christians doesn't necessarily mean it was done in an insulting way, but it could have been. What does seem clear is that they didn't come up with the term themselves.
vs 27
Now here's one for our modern times. Prophets come from Jerusalem. Unnamed prophets. What's their job? What do prophets do? We want to say that they speak the word of God to people. And we'd be right. But what do they do while in Antioch?
vs 28
Well, unnamed except for Agabus. His prophecy comes true, which is good - no need to stone him. But what did he do? Predicted the future! We've got to remember that although we like to say that prophecy is speaking the word of God in all tenses, that future tense isn't out of the question.
Luke even helpfully gives us the time period of the famine.
vs 29
Obviously Judea wasn't doing as well as Antioch. Possibly because they sold all their fields to give to widows and the poor.
vs 30
Barnabas and Saul had a lot more to do with the Jerusalem church than the Antiochans did. In fact, it could be that Barnabas and Saul suggested the gift in the first place.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Acts chapter 11
vs 11
Peter continues to tell his story. The immediacy of their arrival to his vision is important to him.
vs 12
So Peter didn't go alone - some from the house he was staying in obviously went with him. So we have a few Christians at Cornelius' place, supporting Peter.
vs 13-14
What was Peter to say to that? How could he deny their request, if an angel spoke to them and named him specifically?
vs 15
You can't argue with this. The Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit - it's not like they control it.
vs 16
While I think that it's awesome that Peter is quoting Jesus here, what does it actually mean? Is he saying that one replaces the other? Or that this is now the norm? I don't think so. I think the point he is making that this comes directly from Christ.
vs 17
This is the nub of the argument, really. Peter saw God working - how could he go against that?
vs 18
If only all arguments about changing from one thing to another could be sorted out so easily! But the argument isn't over yet. So far, the apostles and Jerusalem church have accept that gentiles can be Christians - great! But they still believe you've got to live like a Jew.
vs 19
That's pretty far, really. Especially since it's only been a few years. But overall, it sounds like they stuck to Jewish settlements.
vs 20
I think the coolest thing about this is that, although the apostles and muscle men (I'm thinking Philip) are the ones who start the 'reaching gentiles' thing and get it stamped with God's authority, it is just new Christians who decide "Let's do something different and reach these people who obviously need to hear, even though we're not sure if it's against the rules or not."
We can get so stuck in our own traditions, that we forget to innovate. Or we can get so focussed on a target group that we can forget that all groups need to hear the gospel. It's usually the people who are on the crest of the wave that want to innovate. And, in my experience, it is usually 'converts' who have the passion, and even then after being involved in the group for a while, that gets sapped away.
Peter continues to tell his story. The immediacy of their arrival to his vision is important to him.
vs 12
So Peter didn't go alone - some from the house he was staying in obviously went with him. So we have a few Christians at Cornelius' place, supporting Peter.
vs 13-14
What was Peter to say to that? How could he deny their request, if an angel spoke to them and named him specifically?
vs 15
You can't argue with this. The Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit - it's not like they control it.
vs 16
While I think that it's awesome that Peter is quoting Jesus here, what does it actually mean? Is he saying that one replaces the other? Or that this is now the norm? I don't think so. I think the point he is making that this comes directly from Christ.
vs 17
This is the nub of the argument, really. Peter saw God working - how could he go against that?
vs 18
If only all arguments about changing from one thing to another could be sorted out so easily! But the argument isn't over yet. So far, the apostles and Jerusalem church have accept that gentiles can be Christians - great! But they still believe you've got to live like a Jew.
vs 19
That's pretty far, really. Especially since it's only been a few years. But overall, it sounds like they stuck to Jewish settlements.
vs 20
I think the coolest thing about this is that, although the apostles and muscle men (I'm thinking Philip) are the ones who start the 'reaching gentiles' thing and get it stamped with God's authority, it is just new Christians who decide "Let's do something different and reach these people who obviously need to hear, even though we're not sure if it's against the rules or not."
We can get so stuck in our own traditions, that we forget to innovate. Or we can get so focussed on a target group that we can forget that all groups need to hear the gospel. It's usually the people who are on the crest of the wave that want to innovate. And, in my experience, it is usually 'converts' who have the passion, and even then after being involved in the group for a while, that gets sapped away.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Acts chapter 11
vs 1
Good news travels fast, it would seem! But did they see it as good news?
vs 2-3
Apparently not. They didn't care that God had done something miraculous, all they cared about where the precepts of the law which hadn't been followed regarding someone's willy.
Remember, these aren't the believers of some outlying town - these are whoever was left in Jerusalem! That could suggest even the apostles.
vs 4
This won't sound repetitive at all...
vs 5-10
Now we see the story from Peter's side. For him, the whole things starts with the vision of a sheet.
What more can I say? This stuff is pretty much verbatim from the story earlier. So why is it repeated? Because we must remember that Bible narratives were written for people to listen to, not just read. Most people didn't read, because of the need to be taught, and also because of the expense of writing materials.
And so the repetition ensures that this story will be remembered. But why should it be? I mean, it's obvious verbatim repetition so close together (twice for Peter, twice for Cornelius) can only mean that Luke thought this event was important enough to repeat. And it is! Unfortunately for us, this uniting of faith between Jew and gentile is so old that it's old news to us, and we don't realise just how earth-shattering it was to the people of the time.
I think the next big social trend of this size and impact was probably the statement that there is less diversity of mental ability and social value than we thought between races.
I guess the only thing I can think of that would create as much of a stir is if someone said that there's no difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals. But then, that would really only stir up more conservative people, I think. Probably a lot of people in the western world don't think of that as a moral line drawn along similar lines to the Jew/Gentile split.
Good news travels fast, it would seem! But did they see it as good news?
vs 2-3
Apparently not. They didn't care that God had done something miraculous, all they cared about where the precepts of the law which hadn't been followed regarding someone's willy.
Remember, these aren't the believers of some outlying town - these are whoever was left in Jerusalem! That could suggest even the apostles.
vs 4
This won't sound repetitive at all...
vs 5-10
Now we see the story from Peter's side. For him, the whole things starts with the vision of a sheet.
What more can I say? This stuff is pretty much verbatim from the story earlier. So why is it repeated? Because we must remember that Bible narratives were written for people to listen to, not just read. Most people didn't read, because of the need to be taught, and also because of the expense of writing materials.
And so the repetition ensures that this story will be remembered. But why should it be? I mean, it's obvious verbatim repetition so close together (twice for Peter, twice for Cornelius) can only mean that Luke thought this event was important enough to repeat. And it is! Unfortunately for us, this uniting of faith between Jew and gentile is so old that it's old news to us, and we don't realise just how earth-shattering it was to the people of the time.
I think the next big social trend of this size and impact was probably the statement that there is less diversity of mental ability and social value than we thought between races.
I guess the only thing I can think of that would create as much of a stir is if someone said that there's no difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals. But then, that would really only stir up more conservative people, I think. Probably a lot of people in the western world don't think of that as a moral line drawn along similar lines to the Jew/Gentile split.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Acts chapter 10
vs 37
Remember, John the Baptist was a celebrity of his time. He's such a bit player to our understanding, but vital to the whole story, and brings it some celebrity air.
vs 38
Did they really know this? Did they know about the baptism of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? Or is this an Eric-like "As you know..." to show that people don't actually know?
And well, if they didn't know, they certainly know now.
vs 39
So Peter can testify to the truth of the stuff they had heard - he was there.
vs 40
And it's good, too, because you sort of need an eye witness account to back up stories of people being raised from the dead after three days.
vs 41
What does this mean, exactly? Is Peter saying that Jesus was invisible to some people, or merely that he didn't actively appear to them? For one thing, we must assume that the teachers of the law didn't see him afterwards. So does it mean that he only appeared to the faithful, as in when they were around, rather than walking the streets of Jerusalem as normal?
vs 42
Jesus was always in a position to command things, but now that he's risen from the dead, who's going to argue? It's an interesting command, too - one that, while it is not against the teachings of the OT, doesn't fit in super- well with the understandings of the OT that most Jews held to at the time. This statement actually brings us with some currency to the beginning of the book of Acts.
vs 43
So as well as the eye witness proof, and the raising from the dead, he has the backing of OT prophecy. This is one potent person, this Jesus. Peter brings out the key point here - the forgiveness of sins through Jesus.
vs 44
Do we assume, then, that all who heard the message were saved? That all who heard the message believed it? I guess so.
vs 45
The last frontier, really. Now God is blessing Gentiles, it's all over for Judaism's classic mix of religion and ethnicity. About time too.
vs 46
The proof was in the pudding - who could argue with the receiving of the Holy Spirit if it takes place exactly in the same way that it did at Pentecost? This is fact the Gentile Pentecost - not as many saved, but a huge step for the faith.
vs 47
Peter states pretty much what I have said, and indicates that they too can accept the mark of those accepted by God in the new covenant - baptism. No cutting off of bits. I for one, as a convert later in life, am thankful.
vs 48
Baptism happened immediately, and now they want to learn more from Peter. What better does he have to do than disciple the first ever Gentile Christians? (Ethiopians excepted).
Remember, John the Baptist was a celebrity of his time. He's such a bit player to our understanding, but vital to the whole story, and brings it some celebrity air.
vs 38
Did they really know this? Did they know about the baptism of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? Or is this an Eric-like "As you know..." to show that people don't actually know?
And well, if they didn't know, they certainly know now.
vs 39
So Peter can testify to the truth of the stuff they had heard - he was there.
vs 40
And it's good, too, because you sort of need an eye witness account to back up stories of people being raised from the dead after three days.
vs 41
What does this mean, exactly? Is Peter saying that Jesus was invisible to some people, or merely that he didn't actively appear to them? For one thing, we must assume that the teachers of the law didn't see him afterwards. So does it mean that he only appeared to the faithful, as in when they were around, rather than walking the streets of Jerusalem as normal?
vs 42
Jesus was always in a position to command things, but now that he's risen from the dead, who's going to argue? It's an interesting command, too - one that, while it is not against the teachings of the OT, doesn't fit in super- well with the understandings of the OT that most Jews held to at the time. This statement actually brings us with some currency to the beginning of the book of Acts.
vs 43
So as well as the eye witness proof, and the raising from the dead, he has the backing of OT prophecy. This is one potent person, this Jesus. Peter brings out the key point here - the forgiveness of sins through Jesus.
vs 44
Do we assume, then, that all who heard the message were saved? That all who heard the message believed it? I guess so.
vs 45
The last frontier, really. Now God is blessing Gentiles, it's all over for Judaism's classic mix of religion and ethnicity. About time too.
vs 46
The proof was in the pudding - who could argue with the receiving of the Holy Spirit if it takes place exactly in the same way that it did at Pentecost? This is fact the Gentile Pentecost - not as many saved, but a huge step for the faith.
vs 47
Peter states pretty much what I have said, and indicates that they too can accept the mark of those accepted by God in the new covenant - baptism. No cutting off of bits. I for one, as a convert later in life, am thankful.
vs 48
Baptism happened immediately, and now they want to learn more from Peter. What better does he have to do than disciple the first ever Gentile Christians? (Ethiopians excepted).
Friday, December 14, 2007
Acts chapter 10
vs 25-26
Why the big deal? Because a Jew walking into a gentile's house is a big deal. Cornelius is probably bowing because Peter is pretty much an angel to him, but for Peter this is a big deal too.
vs 27
Unsurprisingly, as Cornelius had invited them.
vs 28
And considering what evidence we have for this being a problem for Peter, you can imagine that he's probably not the most comfortable person at this very moment.
vs 29
Now, Peter has already asked the servants who brought him about this, so he's not clueless. But I guess he wants a more full story.
vs 30-33
Of course, we know the whole story, but Cornelius probably didn't fill in his servants to that extent. So now Peter, and everyone else in the house too, knows the situation.
vs 34-35
So Peter had an inkling about this before? It's not impossible, as the OT does have a fair bit to say on the subject.
vs 36
They do? Caesarea obviously isn't as far away as we think, newswise. I find it somewhat surprising that Peter says that. Although, with the diaspora of Christians, I guess it is possible that they would have heard the news in the synagogues.
Why the big deal? Because a Jew walking into a gentile's house is a big deal. Cornelius is probably bowing because Peter is pretty much an angel to him, but for Peter this is a big deal too.
vs 27
Unsurprisingly, as Cornelius had invited them.
vs 28
And considering what evidence we have for this being a problem for Peter, you can imagine that he's probably not the most comfortable person at this very moment.
vs 29
Now, Peter has already asked the servants who brought him about this, so he's not clueless. But I guess he wants a more full story.
vs 30-33
Of course, we know the whole story, but Cornelius probably didn't fill in his servants to that extent. So now Peter, and everyone else in the house too, knows the situation.
vs 34-35
So Peter had an inkling about this before? It's not impossible, as the OT does have a fair bit to say on the subject.
vs 36
They do? Caesarea obviously isn't as far away as we think, newswise. I find it somewhat surprising that Peter says that. Although, with the diaspora of Christians, I guess it is possible that they would have heard the news in the synagogues.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Acts chapter 10
vs 13
Of course, we don't have food laws, so apart from the wierdness of eating a snake or a lizard, we wouldn't find this too phasing. So if you want to know how Peter feels about this, then imagine God telling you that you could suddenly do something that had once been disallowed. And I can't think of anything that I can suggest that doesn't feel completely bogus, so I guess that's how Peter felt. Like perhaps being told we can marry as many women as we want. I think I'd rather eat a snake.
vs 14
And I bet he hadn't either! I mean, growing up in a culture that is geared to serve kosher food probably makes that less difficult.
vs 15
Ouch, that's a bit of a comeback. But he was told by the OT to call it unclean!
vs 16
This message was so important, somehow, that it was repeated three times. But what did it mean? Did God just decide that all food was clean to eat now, and that this was the time to reveal it - just because?
vs 17
Coincidence?
vs 18
And Peter, who is on the roof, is like "What the?" One moment he's having a holiday by the sea, the next moment God's telling him to marry a dozen wives (well, to eat weird food) and now there's people knocking at the door. Is it the thought police?
vs 19-20
Peter was in touch! I mean, he's just finished having a vision, and now he's told that the three people downstairs really need him, and that he can't delay! And that he must go with them. This gives Peter the ability to turn up to the door, with these people waiting to meet him, with his bedroll packed, and for the camera to pan in and him to say, "God told me. I'm ready. Let's go." Probably didn't happen that way though.
vs 21
Nope - instead, Peter, regardless of the Spirit's leading, still first asks why they are there. Doubtless he was going to go with them, because God told him to. But I guess he was curious.
vs 22
Can't argue with that. Pretty good one verse summary of the plot so far.
vs 23
That isn't his house, by the way. Cool culture, where you can invite people to be your guests in someone else's house.
vs 24
Wow, Peter has an audience. Probably a fair number too. Cornelius is absolutely sure that whatever Peter has to say is going to be worth hearing.
Of course, we don't have food laws, so apart from the wierdness of eating a snake or a lizard, we wouldn't find this too phasing. So if you want to know how Peter feels about this, then imagine God telling you that you could suddenly do something that had once been disallowed. And I can't think of anything that I can suggest that doesn't feel completely bogus, so I guess that's how Peter felt. Like perhaps being told we can marry as many women as we want. I think I'd rather eat a snake.
vs 14
And I bet he hadn't either! I mean, growing up in a culture that is geared to serve kosher food probably makes that less difficult.
vs 15
Ouch, that's a bit of a comeback. But he was told by the OT to call it unclean!
vs 16
This message was so important, somehow, that it was repeated three times. But what did it mean? Did God just decide that all food was clean to eat now, and that this was the time to reveal it - just because?
vs 17
Coincidence?
vs 18
And Peter, who is on the roof, is like "What the?" One moment he's having a holiday by the sea, the next moment God's telling him to marry a dozen wives (well, to eat weird food) and now there's people knocking at the door. Is it the thought police?
vs 19-20
Peter was in touch! I mean, he's just finished having a vision, and now he's told that the three people downstairs really need him, and that he can't delay! And that he must go with them. This gives Peter the ability to turn up to the door, with these people waiting to meet him, with his bedroll packed, and for the camera to pan in and him to say, "God told me. I'm ready. Let's go." Probably didn't happen that way though.
vs 21
Nope - instead, Peter, regardless of the Spirit's leading, still first asks why they are there. Doubtless he was going to go with them, because God told him to. But I guess he was curious.
vs 22
Can't argue with that. Pretty good one verse summary of the plot so far.
vs 23
That isn't his house, by the way. Cool culture, where you can invite people to be your guests in someone else's house.
vs 24
Wow, Peter has an audience. Probably a fair number too. Cornelius is absolutely sure that whatever Peter has to say is going to be worth hearing.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Acts chapter 10
vs 1
Oooh, it's going to get exciting now. For me, chapters 1-9 of Acts is like the first book of Lord of the Rings - they get the ring, and then spend all this time faffing around doing nothing.
Philip was like the barrow-downs - starts off exciting, then then end up somewhere else.
But now we're going to go on the inevitable path to Gentiles hearing and accepting the gospel. It's awesome.
So here we have an important man. Centurions aren't a dime a dozen, remember. They are leaders of soldiers.
vs 2
Take careful not that this guy isn't a heathen or a pagan. He's a God-fearer. He knows about God already. He fears him, he prays to him, and he tries to help the poor. This isn't just "any gentile". He is prepared soil.
vs 3
Just, you know, one day in the afternoon. About 3 o'clock. That's when these things happen, apparently.
vs 4
Wow. That's like the most awesome message from God to receive ever. What a blessing!
vs 5-6
All I can say is that this sort of stuff does NOT happen every day. I mean, God may as well have given him the page reference of the UBD to look at. It's an incredible time.
vs 7-8
Cornelius didn't have any problems telling them that he'd just seen a vision from God. He made it clear that this was why they were on their mission to Joppa. In asking his servants to do this job, he's making a big call - because they could just as easily think he's crazy. Well, possibly - perhaps people were more open minded back then.
vs 9
It's interesting getting the two sides of the story like this - the servants from one side, Peter from the other. it has that feeling of a story that has been described by eye witnesses and then put together.
vs 10
We're talking about serious prayer here. Prayer with meal breaks.
vs 11
Now, with the inclusion about the hunger earlier, this trance could easily be misinterpreted as a vision out of hunger. But I think that's exactly why Luke includes it - he wants us to realise that God is using Peter's hunger as part of his communication with him. That's extraordinary.
vs 12
That is, things that Jews aren't allowed to eat.
Oooh, it's going to get exciting now. For me, chapters 1-9 of Acts is like the first book of Lord of the Rings - they get the ring, and then spend all this time faffing around doing nothing.
Philip was like the barrow-downs - starts off exciting, then then end up somewhere else.
But now we're going to go on the inevitable path to Gentiles hearing and accepting the gospel. It's awesome.
So here we have an important man. Centurions aren't a dime a dozen, remember. They are leaders of soldiers.
vs 2
Take careful not that this guy isn't a heathen or a pagan. He's a God-fearer. He knows about God already. He fears him, he prays to him, and he tries to help the poor. This isn't just "any gentile". He is prepared soil.
vs 3
Just, you know, one day in the afternoon. About 3 o'clock. That's when these things happen, apparently.
vs 4
Wow. That's like the most awesome message from God to receive ever. What a blessing!
vs 5-6
All I can say is that this sort of stuff does NOT happen every day. I mean, God may as well have given him the page reference of the UBD to look at. It's an incredible time.
vs 7-8
Cornelius didn't have any problems telling them that he'd just seen a vision from God. He made it clear that this was why they were on their mission to Joppa. In asking his servants to do this job, he's making a big call - because they could just as easily think he's crazy. Well, possibly - perhaps people were more open minded back then.
vs 9
It's interesting getting the two sides of the story like this - the servants from one side, Peter from the other. it has that feeling of a story that has been described by eye witnesses and then put together.
vs 10
We're talking about serious prayer here. Prayer with meal breaks.
vs 11
Now, with the inclusion about the hunger earlier, this trance could easily be misinterpreted as a vision out of hunger. But I think that's exactly why Luke includes it - he wants us to realise that God is using Peter's hunger as part of his communication with him. That's extraordinary.
vs 12
That is, things that Jews aren't allowed to eat.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Acts chapter 9
vs 32
After all, most of the Christians who had been dispersed from the persecution would have been from the original Jerusalem church, so he's just keeping tabs on old friends.
vs 33
Who I am assuming from the word 'found' wasn't part of the original Jerusalem church.
vs 34
That's a pretty Christ-y miracle! What was it's purpose though?
vs 35
Now, this actually goes against what I preached about on miracles recently - that miracles don't convince people to believe in God. But I stick by what I say. I think you have to read into this a little bit - people see the miracle, they ask "What's going on?", Peter preaches a sermon, they believe. I know it doesn't say that, but it fits the pattern of Acts.
vs 36
Good for her! I think we've moved on to a new story.
vs 37
Oh, well, that was a short story. I guess when you're always helping the poor and the sick, you can die pretty easily.
vs 38
Ahh, the story isn't over! She was obviously such a valued member of the Christian community, that they wanted Peter to mourn her? Or to bring her back? Or just to replace her with someone else? Who knows why they called on him.
vs 39
Much loved, huge impact life. Sounds like they just wanted Peter to eulogise her.
vs 40
And just like that, Joppa was the scene for a resurrection.
vs 41
I really cannot begin to believe what this would be like in our modern culture. I don't think it would have the same effect, especially if there weren't TV cameras and stuff to prove the miracle was a miracle. Even then, people would argue. "Late Onset Life Return" or something.
vs 42-43
The result in Joppa, though, was that people got to meet this woman with her story, and they believed. I'm sure that, with Peter staying there, they also heard him preach, and that had something to do with it too.
Now we are introduced to a character called Simon the tanner. Who is this person? We may find out tomorrow!
After all, most of the Christians who had been dispersed from the persecution would have been from the original Jerusalem church, so he's just keeping tabs on old friends.
vs 33
Who I am assuming from the word 'found' wasn't part of the original Jerusalem church.
vs 34
That's a pretty Christ-y miracle! What was it's purpose though?
vs 35
Now, this actually goes against what I preached about on miracles recently - that miracles don't convince people to believe in God. But I stick by what I say. I think you have to read into this a little bit - people see the miracle, they ask "What's going on?", Peter preaches a sermon, they believe. I know it doesn't say that, but it fits the pattern of Acts.
vs 36
Good for her! I think we've moved on to a new story.
vs 37
Oh, well, that was a short story. I guess when you're always helping the poor and the sick, you can die pretty easily.
vs 38
Ahh, the story isn't over! She was obviously such a valued member of the Christian community, that they wanted Peter to mourn her? Or to bring her back? Or just to replace her with someone else? Who knows why they called on him.
vs 39
Much loved, huge impact life. Sounds like they just wanted Peter to eulogise her.
vs 40
And just like that, Joppa was the scene for a resurrection.
vs 41
I really cannot begin to believe what this would be like in our modern culture. I don't think it would have the same effect, especially if there weren't TV cameras and stuff to prove the miracle was a miracle. Even then, people would argue. "Late Onset Life Return" or something.
vs 42-43
The result in Joppa, though, was that people got to meet this woman with her story, and they believed. I'm sure that, with Peter staying there, they also heard him preach, and that had something to do with it too.
Now we are introduced to a character called Simon the tanner. Who is this person? We may find out tomorrow!
Monday, December 10, 2007
Acts chapter 9
vs 23
Obviously it started getting to the Jews that their number 1 fighter against Christians changed sides. So the Jews, when faced with trouble, do what they always do - organise to kill the person.
vs 24
These guys are pretty serious. Obviously he was hiding out in the town as well, so they thought the best way of ambushing him was to wait for him to go through the city gates.
vs 25
Sneaky! What an exciting life Saul now leads as a fugitive from Jewish justice.
vs 26
Fair enough, too. I mean, he was pretty much the anti-Christan man of the moment.
vs 27
Good on ya, Barney. It must be really hard for people to join a church in a persecuted area, simply because of this fear. I'm sure every majority religion has considered sending in sleepers against the minority to take them apart from the inside.
vs 28
Because, of course, he' d do less damage in Jerusalem than in Damascus :P
vs 29
Oh wait, obviously he can. It must suck having people try and kill you no matter where you go.
vs 30
For his own good, I assume. Seems like he was a really passionate young man, wanting to spread the gospel wherever he went, but people took unkindly to him, and so the Apostles bundled him off home, to Tarsus.
vs 31
So they bundle Saul off home, and everything is peaceful... for a little while. The church now goes from Judea, to Galilee, to Samaria, and just seems to be consolidating and growing more and more.
Obviously it started getting to the Jews that their number 1 fighter against Christians changed sides. So the Jews, when faced with trouble, do what they always do - organise to kill the person.
vs 24
These guys are pretty serious. Obviously he was hiding out in the town as well, so they thought the best way of ambushing him was to wait for him to go through the city gates.
vs 25
Sneaky! What an exciting life Saul now leads as a fugitive from Jewish justice.
vs 26
Fair enough, too. I mean, he was pretty much the anti-Christan man of the moment.
vs 27
Good on ya, Barney. It must be really hard for people to join a church in a persecuted area, simply because of this fear. I'm sure every majority religion has considered sending in sleepers against the minority to take them apart from the inside.
vs 28
Because, of course, he' d do less damage in Jerusalem than in Damascus :P
vs 29
Oh wait, obviously he can. It must suck having people try and kill you no matter where you go.
vs 30
For his own good, I assume. Seems like he was a really passionate young man, wanting to spread the gospel wherever he went, but people took unkindly to him, and so the Apostles bundled him off home, to Tarsus.
vs 31
So they bundle Saul off home, and everything is peaceful... for a little while. The church now goes from Judea, to Galilee, to Samaria, and just seems to be consolidating and growing more and more.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Acts chapter 9
vs 12
That's a pretty specific vision. Gives the guy's name, what he's going to do. So now God's got to make it happen that way.
vs 13
Ananias wasn't born yeterday. He knows what's going down with Saul.
vs 14
And that, of course, includes Ananias! Not that he's not saying no to God, not even asking why he must do this - only stating to God things that may give him a little concern.
vs 15
Well, that's got to be a bit of a shock to poor Ananias! Now, notice that God's call on Saul is for Gentiles, and also Israel. I never noticed that before.
vs 16
Almost sounds like this is the punishment for Saul running around arresting Christians. But I think it is said in a more fatalistic way - like this is what God has planned for Saul, rather than it's a punishment for him.
vs 17
Well, Saul had seen a vision of it, so I guess he's not going to be totally surprised, but when the guy comes in and tells him what has already happened to him, that was probably something unexpected. Makes him trustworthy though.
Ananias calls him brother. Gutsy.
vs 18-19
Saul would have been pretty much on death's door after not eating and drinking for a few days, but continuing to walk to get to Damascus. So it was either this guy comes and heals him and he accepts the Holy Spirit from God, or he shrivels up and dies.
vs 20
Who I am sure were polite and nice, and constantly wondering if he was going to whip out his letters and arrest them all.
vs 21
Ahh, there they go.
vs 22
Powerful? What does that mean, exactly? It sounds like he's a jedi or something! Or are they just talking about his ability to convince Jews about Jesus as messiah?
That's a pretty specific vision. Gives the guy's name, what he's going to do. So now God's got to make it happen that way.
vs 13
Ananias wasn't born yeterday. He knows what's going down with Saul.
vs 14
And that, of course, includes Ananias! Not that he's not saying no to God, not even asking why he must do this - only stating to God things that may give him a little concern.
vs 15
Well, that's got to be a bit of a shock to poor Ananias! Now, notice that God's call on Saul is for Gentiles, and also Israel. I never noticed that before.
vs 16
Almost sounds like this is the punishment for Saul running around arresting Christians. But I think it is said in a more fatalistic way - like this is what God has planned for Saul, rather than it's a punishment for him.
vs 17
Well, Saul had seen a vision of it, so I guess he's not going to be totally surprised, but when the guy comes in and tells him what has already happened to him, that was probably something unexpected. Makes him trustworthy though.
Ananias calls him brother. Gutsy.
vs 18-19
Saul would have been pretty much on death's door after not eating and drinking for a few days, but continuing to walk to get to Damascus. So it was either this guy comes and heals him and he accepts the Holy Spirit from God, or he shrivels up and dies.
vs 20
Who I am sure were polite and nice, and constantly wondering if he was going to whip out his letters and arrest them all.
vs 21
Ahh, there they go.
vs 22
Powerful? What does that mean, exactly? It sounds like he's a jedi or something! Or are they just talking about his ability to convince Jews about Jesus as messiah?
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Acts chapter 9
vs 1-2
Saul is a man with a mission. This verse makes it obvious that Saul was about locking Christians up in some sort of temple prison. Nasty. He's going as far as Damascus to find them and drag them back to Jerusalem!
Also notice what Christians are called - followers of the 'Way'. Sounds like a bunch of hippies if ever I've heard.
vs 3
Uh oh. Wait, perhaps God is going to reward Saul for his service? Probably not - all the miracles seem to have been on the Christian side so far.
vs 4
Now, normally I would think we would imagine a mighty voice thundering out of the clouds when we imagine this sort of encounter. But the voice is, well, perhaps not pleading, but it is certainly not portrayed as booming.
vs 5
Do you really want to know, Saul? I'm betting you were hoping for another answer. Perhaps because the voice is coming from Jesus and not from God is why it isn't booming and wrath-ready. I think that's a bit simplistic. But it's a nice idea.
vs 6
Jesus doesn't say "Believe that I am the son of God, Saul. Believe that I can take away your sin. Then go and do my work." Jesus owns him already. It's really that simple. Saul has the option of "Yes, Lord" or "Yes, Master".
vs 7
Which makes talk about miracles all the more interesting. Remember John the Baptist saw the Holy Spirit come down on Jesus like a dove. Did everyone else see it, or just him? Stephen saw heaven open - apparently no one else did, or you would assume they'd stop stoning him long enough to look.
So miracles can happen in a way that no one else but you sees. Beware.
However, they did hear the voice! No wonder they were so speechless.
vs 8
That'll learn him. I don't know that this is so much a punishment - I mean, he gets healed when he gets to Damascus. Perhaps it forces him to rely on a Christian? Perhaps it just humbles him because he's got to hold hands all the way to Damascus.
vs 9
That to me says he was feeling kinda humbled. I mean, blindness doesn't prevent you eating or drinking. Especially if you're eating some humble pie.
vs 10
Ananias was quite possibly going to be one of the first people to be locked up by Saul.
vs 11
Instead, God wants Ananias to go knock on his door and say "Hey." I love that in over 2000 years of technological advance, we still name roads things like "Straight Street".
Saul is a man with a mission. This verse makes it obvious that Saul was about locking Christians up in some sort of temple prison. Nasty. He's going as far as Damascus to find them and drag them back to Jerusalem!
Also notice what Christians are called - followers of the 'Way'. Sounds like a bunch of hippies if ever I've heard.
vs 3
Uh oh. Wait, perhaps God is going to reward Saul for his service? Probably not - all the miracles seem to have been on the Christian side so far.
vs 4
Now, normally I would think we would imagine a mighty voice thundering out of the clouds when we imagine this sort of encounter. But the voice is, well, perhaps not pleading, but it is certainly not portrayed as booming.
vs 5
Do you really want to know, Saul? I'm betting you were hoping for another answer. Perhaps because the voice is coming from Jesus and not from God is why it isn't booming and wrath-ready. I think that's a bit simplistic. But it's a nice idea.
vs 6
Jesus doesn't say "Believe that I am the son of God, Saul. Believe that I can take away your sin. Then go and do my work." Jesus owns him already. It's really that simple. Saul has the option of "Yes, Lord" or "Yes, Master".
vs 7
Which makes talk about miracles all the more interesting. Remember John the Baptist saw the Holy Spirit come down on Jesus like a dove. Did everyone else see it, or just him? Stephen saw heaven open - apparently no one else did, or you would assume they'd stop stoning him long enough to look.
So miracles can happen in a way that no one else but you sees. Beware.
However, they did hear the voice! No wonder they were so speechless.
vs 8
That'll learn him. I don't know that this is so much a punishment - I mean, he gets healed when he gets to Damascus. Perhaps it forces him to rely on a Christian? Perhaps it just humbles him because he's got to hold hands all the way to Damascus.
vs 9
That to me says he was feeling kinda humbled. I mean, blindness doesn't prevent you eating or drinking. Especially if you're eating some humble pie.
vs 10
Ananias was quite possibly going to be one of the first people to be locked up by Saul.
vs 11
Instead, God wants Ananias to go knock on his door and say "Hey." I love that in over 2000 years of technological advance, we still name roads things like "Straight Street".
Friday, December 07, 2007
Acts chapter 8
vs 31
I agree with the eunuch. This stuff isn't easy to understand. I think this gives us an insight into the previous knowledge of the eunuch. The idea that he was a proselyte who was schooled in Hebrew religious thought becomes problematic when we think that he doesn't know what Isaiah's about.
vs 32-33
Known so well these days to us as Christians, it is small surprise that we read these great words referred to in the NT. But that they are brought to us by an Ethiopian eunuch just shows so much more powerfully the grace of God. Now the truth is that this stuff could have been happening on a far greater scale than is recorded, and that Luke decided to record this story because of its specific coolness and focus on Isaiah. That doesn't make the story any less cool though.
vs 34
This guy is begging to become a Christian. But before we get too excited about people jumping into our churches left, right and centre, we have to realise that this guy is keen on religious things, seeking the truth, and open to learn.
vs 35
Philip started where the guy was at, and used it to talk about Jesus. Awesome. I mean, it's not the most difficult passage of the OT to talk about Jesus with, I know, but most of the sermons so far have focussed on recent history in Jerusalem, or on Moses and the history of Israel.
vs 36
I don't know that, if I were to explain the gospel of Jesus Christ via Isaiah 53, that baptism would even come to my mouth. So, did baptism spring into the mind of the eunuch, or did Philip mention it in his gospel presentation? I think probably the latter. And you know what? Perhaps that's a good idea. I mean, we talk about making a decision for Christ, or accepting Christ, or whatever. But telling someone that, as part of the gospel, they should be baptised to show that they accept Christ, I wonder if that's something we should consider?
vs 37
Apparently considered a gloss, and so removed from the story by the NIV and the T. Apart from adding a little creedal statement which people could follow when being baptised, I suppose it's not a vital verse. It's inclusion or exclusion is not going to make my faith topple anyway.
vs 38
And so he gets baptised, right then and there. He does it in the presence of his caravan, and I think that's enough - how is the presence of strangers going to make him any more accountable?
vs 39
If it wasn't for the use of the word 'suddenly', we could easily assume that the Spirit led Philip to leave in a normal, on foot manner. But the suddenly makes it sound like Philip was swept away into the distance on a cloud or something. Whatever happened, the eunuch was happy, because he had received the truth about Christ!
vs 40
He appeared. That's kinda weird. Like he teleported there or something. And what's his reaction? Keep preaching. Good for him.
I agree with the eunuch. This stuff isn't easy to understand. I think this gives us an insight into the previous knowledge of the eunuch. The idea that he was a proselyte who was schooled in Hebrew religious thought becomes problematic when we think that he doesn't know what Isaiah's about.
vs 32-33
Known so well these days to us as Christians, it is small surprise that we read these great words referred to in the NT. But that they are brought to us by an Ethiopian eunuch just shows so much more powerfully the grace of God. Now the truth is that this stuff could have been happening on a far greater scale than is recorded, and that Luke decided to record this story because of its specific coolness and focus on Isaiah. That doesn't make the story any less cool though.
vs 34
This guy is begging to become a Christian. But before we get too excited about people jumping into our churches left, right and centre, we have to realise that this guy is keen on religious things, seeking the truth, and open to learn.
vs 35
Philip started where the guy was at, and used it to talk about Jesus. Awesome. I mean, it's not the most difficult passage of the OT to talk about Jesus with, I know, but most of the sermons so far have focussed on recent history in Jerusalem, or on Moses and the history of Israel.
vs 36
I don't know that, if I were to explain the gospel of Jesus Christ via Isaiah 53, that baptism would even come to my mouth. So, did baptism spring into the mind of the eunuch, or did Philip mention it in his gospel presentation? I think probably the latter. And you know what? Perhaps that's a good idea. I mean, we talk about making a decision for Christ, or accepting Christ, or whatever. But telling someone that, as part of the gospel, they should be baptised to show that they accept Christ, I wonder if that's something we should consider?
vs 37
Apparently considered a gloss, and so removed from the story by the NIV and the T. Apart from adding a little creedal statement which people could follow when being baptised, I suppose it's not a vital verse. It's inclusion or exclusion is not going to make my faith topple anyway.
vs 38
And so he gets baptised, right then and there. He does it in the presence of his caravan, and I think that's enough - how is the presence of strangers going to make him any more accountable?
vs 39
If it wasn't for the use of the word 'suddenly', we could easily assume that the Spirit led Philip to leave in a normal, on foot manner. But the suddenly makes it sound like Philip was swept away into the distance on a cloud or something. Whatever happened, the eunuch was happy, because he had received the truth about Christ!
vs 40
He appeared. That's kinda weird. Like he teleported there or something. And what's his reaction? Keep preaching. Good for him.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Acts chapter 8
vs 21
Peter out and out accuses Simon of wanting this ability for sinister purposes.
vs 22
Peter doesn't just leave him there, though. He does give him a solution to his problem. Simon was baptised, remember! He's a believer as far as we know. So Peter recommends that he repents and prays to God. Which sounds like sound advice to anyone who has a sinful attitude.
vs 23
This verse, if any, is the one which you could point to if you were trying to make an argument for Simon not being saved. "If Simon is a believer, how is he still captive to sin?" you might ask.
All I can say to that is 'be realistic'. All people, Christians included, are captive to sin, and thanks be to Christ our Lord who delivers us. And yes, he does that to a degree in our physical lives here and now. But he doesn't surgically remove sin from our lives.
vs 24
Keep in mind that all Peter cursed Simon with was the loss of his money. Unless all the other accusations Peter made were in a cursing type language. If you contrast Simon's attitude (Oh please I don't want to lose my dosh!) to most of the other early Christian's attitude (lets pool our money and posessions aren't really so important), you can see a disparity.
The question that is always raised is, does Simon ask Peter to pray for him because he doesn't believe God will listen to him personally? Or does he ask Peter to pray as well for him, in a sort of intercessory way?
vs 25
Peter and John have seen what they needed to see - the Samaritans being accepted by God through the Holy Spirit - and so they return to Jerusalem, but decide they'll share the love by spreading Christ all the way home. Good for them. I guess that's one of the benefits of walking everywhere - you see a lot more people.
vs 26
Did God's voice just speak to Philip? Or did Philip just end up going to that road on a hunch, or on his morning walk? Doesn't say.
vs 27
So many people think that the 'to the ends of the earth' ministry started with Paul, or perhaps Peter. But here it is, starting with Philip. He stumbles across this important Ethiopian guy. Why did he go to Jerusalem to worship? If he thought he was going to see Solomon's temple, he's only about 1000 years out of date. However, Herod's (the Tetrarch) temple was also supposed to be pretty special.
vs 28
Don't discount how important this is. You couldn't just pick up a paperback of Isaiah on a street corner. He would have to have outlayed a fairly significant sum to get it. We've got to also assume that it was in Greek, because as if he'd be able to read Hebrew.
vs 29
Ok, now it's not as if you just walked up to chariots and said "Yo." Well, I don't know, perhaps you did. But I'm guessing not. So you've got to assume that God in some more direct way led Philip to do that.
vs 30
Thankfully the guy was reading it out - otherwise Philip would have had to start his conversation with "Excuse me? Can you help me with something? Mind if I sit down? My name is Stu, and I work with mainstream churches - Jerusalem, Samaria - nothing weird, so you can just relax..."
I really do pity the poor Ethiopian guy though. I mean, Isaiah is not easy to understand at the best of times. But just picking it up out of the blue and reading it, without any idea of historical context... well, that would be like how most Christians read it I guess.
Peter out and out accuses Simon of wanting this ability for sinister purposes.
vs 22
Peter doesn't just leave him there, though. He does give him a solution to his problem. Simon was baptised, remember! He's a believer as far as we know. So Peter recommends that he repents and prays to God. Which sounds like sound advice to anyone who has a sinful attitude.
vs 23
This verse, if any, is the one which you could point to if you were trying to make an argument for Simon not being saved. "If Simon is a believer, how is he still captive to sin?" you might ask.
All I can say to that is 'be realistic'. All people, Christians included, are captive to sin, and thanks be to Christ our Lord who delivers us. And yes, he does that to a degree in our physical lives here and now. But he doesn't surgically remove sin from our lives.
vs 24
Keep in mind that all Peter cursed Simon with was the loss of his money. Unless all the other accusations Peter made were in a cursing type language. If you contrast Simon's attitude (Oh please I don't want to lose my dosh!) to most of the other early Christian's attitude (lets pool our money and posessions aren't really so important), you can see a disparity.
The question that is always raised is, does Simon ask Peter to pray for him because he doesn't believe God will listen to him personally? Or does he ask Peter to pray as well for him, in a sort of intercessory way?
vs 25
Peter and John have seen what they needed to see - the Samaritans being accepted by God through the Holy Spirit - and so they return to Jerusalem, but decide they'll share the love by spreading Christ all the way home. Good for them. I guess that's one of the benefits of walking everywhere - you see a lot more people.
vs 26
Did God's voice just speak to Philip? Or did Philip just end up going to that road on a hunch, or on his morning walk? Doesn't say.
vs 27
So many people think that the 'to the ends of the earth' ministry started with Paul, or perhaps Peter. But here it is, starting with Philip. He stumbles across this important Ethiopian guy. Why did he go to Jerusalem to worship? If he thought he was going to see Solomon's temple, he's only about 1000 years out of date. However, Herod's (the Tetrarch) temple was also supposed to be pretty special.
vs 28
Don't discount how important this is. You couldn't just pick up a paperback of Isaiah on a street corner. He would have to have outlayed a fairly significant sum to get it. We've got to also assume that it was in Greek, because as if he'd be able to read Hebrew.
vs 29
Ok, now it's not as if you just walked up to chariots and said "Yo." Well, I don't know, perhaps you did. But I'm guessing not. So you've got to assume that God in some more direct way led Philip to do that.
vs 30
Thankfully the guy was reading it out - otherwise Philip would have had to start his conversation with "Excuse me? Can you help me with something? Mind if I sit down? My name is Stu, and I work with mainstream churches - Jerusalem, Samaria - nothing weird, so you can just relax..."
I really do pity the poor Ethiopian guy though. I mean, Isaiah is not easy to understand at the best of times. But just picking it up out of the blue and reading it, without any idea of historical context... well, that would be like how most Christians read it I guess.
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Acts chapter 8
vs 11
So it's not like he wasn't an influential person. He wasn't a pathetic carney with cards up his sleeve. People respected him.
vs 12
Philip obviously had quite an impact on the Samarians in the town he visited. Interesting that we don't even get the name of the town - perhaps this visit is meant to be seen as typical of the kind of thing people were doing, as well as the response they were getting.
vs 13
This isn't the first time that magicians have been totally impressed by miracles from God - think of the magicians in Pharoah's court. However, even though several magicians have been used by God to do things, I can't think of a time when one has come to know God and follow him.
vs 14
Now obviously not the whole of Samaria had accepted the gospel, but the idea that even some of them had was special enough for an envoy of apostles to go. Peter and John are big names.
vs 15-16
I will freely admit that these verses indicate that you can be baptised without also receiving the Holy Spirit. However, what I won't agree to is that this means that this is the only way to receive the Holy Spirit. Not even Acts makes that claim.
vs 17
This time, they did receive the Holy Spirit through Peter and John. A conservative anti-charismatic evangelical view of this is that the Holy Spirit didn't come until the apostles got there so that they could see for themselves that the Holy Spirit was spreading even to non-Jews.
vs 18-19
What were his motives? Did he truly understand what giving the Holy Spirit does? Did it even have a physical marker to tell that it had been passed? You want to say yes, because it has had one already (at Pentecost) and you assume that he is amazed at something he saw.
But, do you think everything magicians did had an immediate physical effect? Isn't knowing that you're passing on the Holy Spirit enough? The answer is we don't know. Anything we say beyond what is written here is conjecture.
vs 20
Here starts Peter's long and angry tirade against Simon. He starts off with a curse, and then by stating his first reason - that the Holy Spirit is a gift, and it cannot be bought (and the suggestion is probably that it can't be sold either, but again that hasn't been out and out said yet).
So it's not like he wasn't an influential person. He wasn't a pathetic carney with cards up his sleeve. People respected him.
vs 12
Philip obviously had quite an impact on the Samarians in the town he visited. Interesting that we don't even get the name of the town - perhaps this visit is meant to be seen as typical of the kind of thing people were doing, as well as the response they were getting.
vs 13
This isn't the first time that magicians have been totally impressed by miracles from God - think of the magicians in Pharoah's court. However, even though several magicians have been used by God to do things, I can't think of a time when one has come to know God and follow him.
vs 14
Now obviously not the whole of Samaria had accepted the gospel, but the idea that even some of them had was special enough for an envoy of apostles to go. Peter and John are big names.
vs 15-16
I will freely admit that these verses indicate that you can be baptised without also receiving the Holy Spirit. However, what I won't agree to is that this means that this is the only way to receive the Holy Spirit. Not even Acts makes that claim.
vs 17
This time, they did receive the Holy Spirit through Peter and John. A conservative anti-charismatic evangelical view of this is that the Holy Spirit didn't come until the apostles got there so that they could see for themselves that the Holy Spirit was spreading even to non-Jews.
vs 18-19
What were his motives? Did he truly understand what giving the Holy Spirit does? Did it even have a physical marker to tell that it had been passed? You want to say yes, because it has had one already (at Pentecost) and you assume that he is amazed at something he saw.
But, do you think everything magicians did had an immediate physical effect? Isn't knowing that you're passing on the Holy Spirit enough? The answer is we don't know. Anything we say beyond what is written here is conjecture.
vs 20
Here starts Peter's long and angry tirade against Simon. He starts off with a curse, and then by stating his first reason - that the Holy Spirit is a gift, and it cannot be bought (and the suggestion is probably that it can't be sold either, but again that hasn't been out and out said yet).
Monday, December 03, 2007
Acts chapter 8
vs 1
Evil bugger. Not only did he approve their killing of Stephen, but that day was the start of a move so big that almost all the Christians in Jerusalem were scattered. Of course, we know that this only triggered a greater growth, but at the time it still would have been nasty.
vs 2
He was a good man, and of course they regretted the loss of a brother and a servant.
vs 3
Who's prison, I wonder? The temple prison? Surely not roman prisons.
vs 4
Did God plan this? Or is he just using evil for good?
vs 5
Samaria is the next place on our list after Jerusalem and Judea. It's the first neighbour to the Jews.
vs 6
We don't get miracles like they did to accompany our message. But we do other things, like serve people and be loving.
vs 7
This happens when we send doctors, I guess (except for the spirits thing), but apart from that we don't tend to have such things accompany us. Why? Don't know.
vs 8
Joy for the miracles, or the message? Or both? Anyway, there was joy.
vs 9-10
Remember, this guy actually did special things. People saw them and attributed to him power, even the power of God for some reason (perhaps because if he were a sorcerer they'd stone him?).
Evil bugger. Not only did he approve their killing of Stephen, but that day was the start of a move so big that almost all the Christians in Jerusalem were scattered. Of course, we know that this only triggered a greater growth, but at the time it still would have been nasty.
vs 2
He was a good man, and of course they regretted the loss of a brother and a servant.
vs 3
Who's prison, I wonder? The temple prison? Surely not roman prisons.
vs 4
Did God plan this? Or is he just using evil for good?
vs 5
Samaria is the next place on our list after Jerusalem and Judea. It's the first neighbour to the Jews.
vs 6
We don't get miracles like they did to accompany our message. But we do other things, like serve people and be loving.
vs 7
This happens when we send doctors, I guess (except for the spirits thing), but apart from that we don't tend to have such things accompany us. Why? Don't know.
vs 8
Joy for the miracles, or the message? Or both? Anyway, there was joy.
vs 9-10
Remember, this guy actually did special things. People saw them and attributed to him power, even the power of God for some reason (perhaps because if he were a sorcerer they'd stone him?).
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Acts chapter 7
vs 51
Uh oh. Now he's not just telling them the story - he's applying it to his audience. And he's doing it in OT language, too! Although his last accusation in this verse is not OT language at all! The Holy Spirit rarely gets mentioned.
vs 52
Wow, the language is so venomous! Here we learn about the death of the prophets (mostly at the hands of the religious leaders!) and of the Christ himself - which is a common enough theme with Peter, so it's not surprising that it's spread.
vs 53
Could you be any harsher? They resist the Holy Spirit, kill God's prophets, kill his holy promised one, and they don't even obey the Law!
vs 54
Ooh, grrr.
vs 55-56
It was one of the last things he'd ever see, so I guess God wanted to make it nice. I'm not really sure what the reason for the inclusion of these two verses is - I mean, is this what pushes the religious leaders over the edge - that he is claiming to see Jesus standing at the right hand of God? Or is it that he is claiming to see God, and they can't?
vs 57
So mature! The picture here is just so comic. If they weren't about to kill Stephen, I'd think it was some sort of highjinx.
vs 58
But they do kill Stephen. And it is here that we are first introduced to a man called Saul. The persecution of Christians by the Jews begins here in earnest, with the first killing.
vs 59-60
I don't know how literally to read this. Him comitting his spirit to God is perfectly reasonable. Him even crying out to God not to hold this sin against them is tragically noble, but believeable. But him falling asleep? I mean, perhaps he got beaned by a rock and knocked unconscious, and started snoring. Perhaps this is just a euphemistic way of talking about Christian death. I mean, he died. Oh, he so died. But did he fall asleep first? I've heard people give sermons taking this verse literally.
Uh oh. Now he's not just telling them the story - he's applying it to his audience. And he's doing it in OT language, too! Although his last accusation in this verse is not OT language at all! The Holy Spirit rarely gets mentioned.
vs 52
Wow, the language is so venomous! Here we learn about the death of the prophets (mostly at the hands of the religious leaders!) and of the Christ himself - which is a common enough theme with Peter, so it's not surprising that it's spread.
vs 53
Could you be any harsher? They resist the Holy Spirit, kill God's prophets, kill his holy promised one, and they don't even obey the Law!
vs 54
Ooh, grrr.
vs 55-56
It was one of the last things he'd ever see, so I guess God wanted to make it nice. I'm not really sure what the reason for the inclusion of these two verses is - I mean, is this what pushes the religious leaders over the edge - that he is claiming to see Jesus standing at the right hand of God? Or is it that he is claiming to see God, and they can't?
vs 57
So mature! The picture here is just so comic. If they weren't about to kill Stephen, I'd think it was some sort of highjinx.
vs 58
But they do kill Stephen. And it is here that we are first introduced to a man called Saul. The persecution of Christians by the Jews begins here in earnest, with the first killing.
vs 59-60
I don't know how literally to read this. Him comitting his spirit to God is perfectly reasonable. Him even crying out to God not to hold this sin against them is tragically noble, but believeable. But him falling asleep? I mean, perhaps he got beaned by a rock and knocked unconscious, and started snoring. Perhaps this is just a euphemistic way of talking about Christian death. I mean, he died. Oh, he so died. But did he fall asleep first? I've heard people give sermons taking this verse literally.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Acts chapter 7
vs 41
Not exactly Israel's strongest time as the people of God. In fact, it is all the more shocking for its immediacy after their rescue from Egypt.
vs 42-43
These verses telescope a bit, and that is far more prevalent in Jewish writing than we give credit for I think. I mean, it's not like the Jews were worshipping these gods at that moment under Mount Sinai. But they did end up doing it.
vs 44
Ahhh, the tabernacle. The whole idea was that it would be representative of God's presence with them. But of course, God at Sinai threatened to leave them and let them go without him. So having the tabernacle didn't force God to go with them.
vs 45
It kinda remained in the land until David. I mean, it was still in the land when it was captured by the Philistines.
vs 46-47
And yet God refused him. As great as he was, he was not allowed to build God's temple. We've gone well beyond Moses now, into Davidic history, so we assume that Stephen is coming to a wrap-up.
vs 48-50
Oh so true. He doesn't live in tents built by them either. The fact is that God chooses his presence to be with people or not with people. And what kind of people were Israel?
Not exactly Israel's strongest time as the people of God. In fact, it is all the more shocking for its immediacy after their rescue from Egypt.
vs 42-43
These verses telescope a bit, and that is far more prevalent in Jewish writing than we give credit for I think. I mean, it's not like the Jews were worshipping these gods at that moment under Mount Sinai. But they did end up doing it.
vs 44
Ahhh, the tabernacle. The whole idea was that it would be representative of God's presence with them. But of course, God at Sinai threatened to leave them and let them go without him. So having the tabernacle didn't force God to go with them.
vs 45
It kinda remained in the land until David. I mean, it was still in the land when it was captured by the Philistines.
vs 46-47
And yet God refused him. As great as he was, he was not allowed to build God's temple. We've gone well beyond Moses now, into Davidic history, so we assume that Stephen is coming to a wrap-up.
vs 48-50
Oh so true. He doesn't live in tents built by them either. The fact is that God chooses his presence to be with people or not with people. And what kind of people were Israel?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)