A Proper Salutation
1 Thessalonians 1 is a short chapter that contains only the greeting from Paul to the Thessalonian church. As you can see, Paul was very pleased to hear the church is doing well. Paul was a bitter worried, when he left under persecution that the church would be crushed under the weight of opposition, but the church was strong and their faith became an example to the other churches around the area.
I want to focus on verses 2 and 3 today. Notice Paul's prayer for the Thessalonians. He mentions three characteristics of the people there and what produced each of those things. We are all familiar with 1 Corinthians 13 at the end where Paul says, "These three remain, faith, hope, and love..." Notice in these two verses that Paul mentions all three. They are the three things that produce the characteristics of the Thessalonians.
1) Faith produced their work. Here Paul is talking about the initial acceptance of the message by the Thessalonian people. There was no particular reason why they might believe Paul other than the fact that they recognized the power of God behind it. But at some point there was a "leap of faith" that needed to happen. Even though they didn't know everything about Jesus, they knew enough to make the commitment to Him and learn the rest on the fly.
2) Love prompted their labor. Labor sounds hard. It's more than just "work." Labor is striving to move things forward--to make progress even when the work is hard. Love is the motivation for that. Some people will work hard for money, but money is not the best motivator. But love--that's the greatest motivator. People will endure endless hardship and heartache for love.
3) Endurance inspired by hope. Hope is the perfect inspiration for endurance. Endurance is the willingness to stick to something under opposition. Labor is hard work at a singular time, but endurance is continuing that labor for an extended amount of time. Only future hope can motivate endurance. If we think our efforts are in vain and we lose hope, we will give up. Hope says there's something better awaiting us around the corner.
Later in the book of 1 Thessalonians, Paul will talk about the coming of Jesus and our own resurrection. It's that hope that sustained the people in Thessalonica. Remember, at that time the idea of life after death was something that was hotly debated, even among the Jews. (Remember the Pharisees believed in resurrection and the Sadducees didn't.) Resurrection was not a common thought among the pagans, either. So when Paul came to them with the hope of resurrection and a better life after life, it made it much easier for them to risk their lives with the Gospel than if the believed this was all there is to life and they you die.
That's why the resurrection of Jesus is so important in the writings of Paul--because of Jesus' resurrection, we can know that resurrection will happen. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says, "But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep." Jesus' resurrection is the proof of our own future resurrection. That our hope and that is why we endure in this life, even to death.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
NT Journey--Intro to 1 Thessalonians
Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians very early in his ministry. Most believe around 50-51 AD. Wrote the letter while he was in Corinth, shortly after his trip to Thessalonica where he founded the church. You can read about his short stay in Thessalonica in Acts 17:1-9. It was a short and eventful stay with a riot forming shortly after he began preaching there. Since he moved along so hastily after that, the let is intended to encourage and instruct the new Thessalonian believers in the middle of the trials they were facing.
If you can imagine the scene in those days, there were many pagans in the city of Thessalonica, since it was a Roman city. There was a synagogue there, so there was a contingent of Jews around, but primarily the new believers there would have been Gentiles. At the time Paul was starting new churches, they didn't have the New Testament. The Gentiles would most likely not have been familiar with what we call the Old Testament (what the Jews used as their Bible at the time) and for the Jews, the message of Jesus was brand-new as well. So imagine how lost they must have felt when Paul left them abruptly.
Not only this, but he left them in the middle of a riot. It seems as though the city was against them and even the bulk of Jews were against these new believers. Yet they continued on in the faith. They were dedicated, but needed instruction. For having no technology to speak of, Paul was able to do a good amount of communication with the various churches. He would hear news from messengers and either send them back to the church or he would send one of his guys (Silas, Timothy, etc.) to deliver the letters.
1 Thessalonians is Paul's response to a report delivered by Timothy. Although they were undergoing a great deal of persecution, they were holding firm in their faith and acting as examples to the churches everywhere. The tone of 1 Thessalonians is much different that what we found in Galatians.
If you can imagine the scene in those days, there were many pagans in the city of Thessalonica, since it was a Roman city. There was a synagogue there, so there was a contingent of Jews around, but primarily the new believers there would have been Gentiles. At the time Paul was starting new churches, they didn't have the New Testament. The Gentiles would most likely not have been familiar with what we call the Old Testament (what the Jews used as their Bible at the time) and for the Jews, the message of Jesus was brand-new as well. So imagine how lost they must have felt when Paul left them abruptly.
Not only this, but he left them in the middle of a riot. It seems as though the city was against them and even the bulk of Jews were against these new believers. Yet they continued on in the faith. They were dedicated, but needed instruction. For having no technology to speak of, Paul was able to do a good amount of communication with the various churches. He would hear news from messengers and either send them back to the church or he would send one of his guys (Silas, Timothy, etc.) to deliver the letters.
1 Thessalonians is Paul's response to a report delivered by Timothy. Although they were undergoing a great deal of persecution, they were holding firm in their faith and acting as examples to the churches everywhere. The tone of 1 Thessalonians is much different that what we found in Galatians.
NT Journey--Galatians 6
Kissing Cousins
Though Paul doesn't state it explicitly in chapter 6, Paul draws an interesting comparison between the two types of slavery he mentions in chapter 5--slavery to sin and slavery to the law. Neither is appropriate for the believer (or anyone for that matter). The person who continues to allow himself to be a slave to sin has given up. We all have a conscience and we know the basic difference between right and wrong because it's written on our hearts. When we know we are a slave to sin and we do nothing about it, we have resigned ourselves to less than what we were created for.
He says that when someone is caught in sin, others should "restore him gently." Let's pick out a couple of things here.
First, he implies that we should take action. We can often times be very passive when we know someone is in sin. We can also pick and choose which sins we act upon and which we don't. We often see sexual sins as being the worst sins. Actually, you could make a case that while sexual sins are clearly sin, other sins like greed, gossip, and divisive behavior are actually more damaging to the church. But we tend to let those go and reluctantly confront the sexual sinner.
Second, when we do act on a brother's (or sister's) sin, we do so with the intent of restoration, not condemnation. This is where it's helpful to look at sin from a relational, rather than legal perspective. When we see sin from a legal perspective, the sinner needs to be punished, so we'll see it as our job to punish them. But when we see sin as broken relationship, then the goal is to restore relationship. In 2 Corinthians we'll see that Christ came for reconciliation and that Paul says Jesus gave us the ministry of reconciliation that God is "not counting men's sins against them." There a difference in the way we approach things when we seek to restore rather than punish.
Finally, it's a process that requires a great deal of gentleness. You never know how someone is going to respond when you approach them about there sin, but one thing is for sure. If you go to someone in an accusative, judgmental manner, your conversation will be counter-productive. Instead of reconciliation you'll on succeed in driving a wedge further between yourself and the person or the person and God. One thing that helps with gentleness is to always be aware of your own sin. When we are aware that we, too are sinners, it's much more difficult to accuse others.
I heard Tony Campolo say something interesting. He said something to this effect: We all think Jesus taught us to "love the sinner and hate the sin" but really what Jesus taught us is to love the sinner and hate our own sin." It's hard to be judgmental when we are aware of our own need of grace. That doesn't mean that we can't deal with sin. It does mean that we deal with sin in a different way.
That's why churches need to communicate about this issue often. People in the church need to learn how to restore relationships and to be able to accept when someone else comes to them with their sin.
Well, that was the book of Galatians...quick and painless--well, almost. What are your thoughts on the book of Galatians? Anything stick out to you? Did you learn something that you didn't understand before?
Though Paul doesn't state it explicitly in chapter 6, Paul draws an interesting comparison between the two types of slavery he mentions in chapter 5--slavery to sin and slavery to the law. Neither is appropriate for the believer (or anyone for that matter). The person who continues to allow himself to be a slave to sin has given up. We all have a conscience and we know the basic difference between right and wrong because it's written on our hearts. When we know we are a slave to sin and we do nothing about it, we have resigned ourselves to less than what we were created for.
He says that when someone is caught in sin, others should "restore him gently." Let's pick out a couple of things here.
First, he implies that we should take action. We can often times be very passive when we know someone is in sin. We can also pick and choose which sins we act upon and which we don't. We often see sexual sins as being the worst sins. Actually, you could make a case that while sexual sins are clearly sin, other sins like greed, gossip, and divisive behavior are actually more damaging to the church. But we tend to let those go and reluctantly confront the sexual sinner.
Second, when we do act on a brother's (or sister's) sin, we do so with the intent of restoration, not condemnation. This is where it's helpful to look at sin from a relational, rather than legal perspective. When we see sin from a legal perspective, the sinner needs to be punished, so we'll see it as our job to punish them. But when we see sin as broken relationship, then the goal is to restore relationship. In 2 Corinthians we'll see that Christ came for reconciliation and that Paul says Jesus gave us the ministry of reconciliation that God is "not counting men's sins against them." There a difference in the way we approach things when we seek to restore rather than punish.
Finally, it's a process that requires a great deal of gentleness. You never know how someone is going to respond when you approach them about there sin, but one thing is for sure. If you go to someone in an accusative, judgmental manner, your conversation will be counter-productive. Instead of reconciliation you'll on succeed in driving a wedge further between yourself and the person or the person and God. One thing that helps with gentleness is to always be aware of your own sin. When we are aware that we, too are sinners, it's much more difficult to accuse others.
I heard Tony Campolo say something interesting. He said something to this effect: We all think Jesus taught us to "love the sinner and hate the sin" but really what Jesus taught us is to love the sinner and hate our own sin." It's hard to be judgmental when we are aware of our own need of grace. That doesn't mean that we can't deal with sin. It does mean that we deal with sin in a different way.
That's why churches need to communicate about this issue often. People in the church need to learn how to restore relationships and to be able to accept when someone else comes to them with their sin.
Well, that was the book of Galatians...quick and painless--well, almost. What are your thoughts on the book of Galatians? Anything stick out to you? Did you learn something that you didn't understand before?
Friday, March 26, 2010
NT Journey--Galatians 5
What is Freedom?
To me, Galatians 5 is the highlight of the book of Galatians. Usually when people think of Christianity, they don't think of freedom. In fact, usually that's the last thing on their mind. More often they see it as strict and stifling or dull. I think Christians have earned this reputation because too often, that's the way we live out our faith. But when we really understand Galatians 5, it's hard to see why we got to be the way we are.
Paul starts the chapter by writing, "It is for freedom that Christ has set you free!" Freedom, of course, is the opposite of slavery. According to Paul there are two different kinds of slavery.
The first kind of slavery is the kind we're very familiar with--slavery to sin. We love to talk about this in the church. We love to speak against "those people" who are slaves to sin. But not us. Because we're in the church, we don't think of ourselves as slaves to sin. Now there is some truth to that. The Bible does tell us, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." When we come to know and trust Jesus, that becomes true of us. Whether we actually live that way is another question entirely. Even though we are forgiven, we can still live with a nagging sense of guilt and shame. We say we are free, but many Christians don't really live lives of freedom.
The other kind of slavery is slavery to the Law. Slavery to the Law can manifest itself in the same way slavery to sin does--feelings of guilt, shame and regret and the urge to try to make up for our sin. People who are slaves to the Law will work very hard to always to "the right thing." The "right thing" in this case is following the rules. Let's take this as example:
You're living in Germany while Hitler is rounding up Jews. Being the good Christian you are, you decide you will hide some Jews in your basement. The Nazi's get word of this and they knock on your door. You answer the door and when they ask you if you're hiding some Jews, you have a dilemma. On the one hand, you very much want to save the lives of the Jewish family you're hiding. On the other hand, you know very well that one of the Ten Commandments is "thou shalt not bear false witness..." Someone who is a slave to the Law will have a dilemma, someone who has freedom in Christ will not.
The slave to the Law would be inclined to tell the truth because he wants to make sure he is pure before the Law. Even if that person does lie to save the Jews' lives, he will feel guilty or sad about it. But the person who has freedom in Christ will not think twice about it--he will lie through his teeth and rejoice that he has saved lives from unthinkable evil.
Why no dilemma? How can someone who has freedom in Christ be so cavalier about the Law? Well, it's because the person who is free in Christ really understands what the Law is all about. The Law is all about LOVE. Remember in Matthew 22 when Jesus was asked, "What is the greatest commandment?" He answered, "Love God and love your neighbor as yourself. If you do these things, you've fulfilled the Law."
So the person who has freedom in Christ understands that the prohibition against lying is not to keep you technically righteous, but it's to keep people from lying to cheat another person out of something or to save your own skin when you do something wrong. Clearly, hiding Jews during the Holocaust at great personal risk is the most loving thing you could do, so that action even if you have to technically lie is the righteous thing to do. I would much rather be technically wrong and lovingly right.
In verse 6, Paul writes, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." What he's saying is that whether you technically obey the Law or night is really missing the point. The point--the only point that counts--is faith expressing itself through love.
So we are not slaves to sin or to the Law, but instead Paul urges Christians to "live by the Spirit." The Spirit is the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of Christ. So when we stay in tune with the Spirit, Paul says we naturally won't "gratify the desires of the sinful nature." He also says that people who live by the Spirit are not under the Law--they really don't think about it. They don't have to because when we're in touch with the Spirit, we will almost automatically do the loving thing. We don't need "the Law" because it's written on our hearts.
So the freedom we have is not to indulge the sinful nature--Paul says those things are obvious. But living by the Spirit will result in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. There's no law against those things!
To me, Galatians 5 is the highlight of the book of Galatians. Usually when people think of Christianity, they don't think of freedom. In fact, usually that's the last thing on their mind. More often they see it as strict and stifling or dull. I think Christians have earned this reputation because too often, that's the way we live out our faith. But when we really understand Galatians 5, it's hard to see why we got to be the way we are.
Paul starts the chapter by writing, "It is for freedom that Christ has set you free!" Freedom, of course, is the opposite of slavery. According to Paul there are two different kinds of slavery.
The first kind of slavery is the kind we're very familiar with--slavery to sin. We love to talk about this in the church. We love to speak against "those people" who are slaves to sin. But not us. Because we're in the church, we don't think of ourselves as slaves to sin. Now there is some truth to that. The Bible does tell us, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." When we come to know and trust Jesus, that becomes true of us. Whether we actually live that way is another question entirely. Even though we are forgiven, we can still live with a nagging sense of guilt and shame. We say we are free, but many Christians don't really live lives of freedom.
The other kind of slavery is slavery to the Law. Slavery to the Law can manifest itself in the same way slavery to sin does--feelings of guilt, shame and regret and the urge to try to make up for our sin. People who are slaves to the Law will work very hard to always to "the right thing." The "right thing" in this case is following the rules. Let's take this as example:
You're living in Germany while Hitler is rounding up Jews. Being the good Christian you are, you decide you will hide some Jews in your basement. The Nazi's get word of this and they knock on your door. You answer the door and when they ask you if you're hiding some Jews, you have a dilemma. On the one hand, you very much want to save the lives of the Jewish family you're hiding. On the other hand, you know very well that one of the Ten Commandments is "thou shalt not bear false witness..." Someone who is a slave to the Law will have a dilemma, someone who has freedom in Christ will not.
The slave to the Law would be inclined to tell the truth because he wants to make sure he is pure before the Law. Even if that person does lie to save the Jews' lives, he will feel guilty or sad about it. But the person who has freedom in Christ will not think twice about it--he will lie through his teeth and rejoice that he has saved lives from unthinkable evil.
Why no dilemma? How can someone who has freedom in Christ be so cavalier about the Law? Well, it's because the person who is free in Christ really understands what the Law is all about. The Law is all about LOVE. Remember in Matthew 22 when Jesus was asked, "What is the greatest commandment?" He answered, "Love God and love your neighbor as yourself. If you do these things, you've fulfilled the Law."
So the person who has freedom in Christ understands that the prohibition against lying is not to keep you technically righteous, but it's to keep people from lying to cheat another person out of something or to save your own skin when you do something wrong. Clearly, hiding Jews during the Holocaust at great personal risk is the most loving thing you could do, so that action even if you have to technically lie is the righteous thing to do. I would much rather be technically wrong and lovingly right.
In verse 6, Paul writes, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." What he's saying is that whether you technically obey the Law or night is really missing the point. The point--the only point that counts--is faith expressing itself through love.
So we are not slaves to sin or to the Law, but instead Paul urges Christians to "live by the Spirit." The Spirit is the Holy Spirit, which is the Spirit of Christ. So when we stay in tune with the Spirit, Paul says we naturally won't "gratify the desires of the sinful nature." He also says that people who live by the Spirit are not under the Law--they really don't think about it. They don't have to because when we're in touch with the Spirit, we will almost automatically do the loving thing. We don't need "the Law" because it's written on our hearts.
So the freedom we have is not to indulge the sinful nature--Paul says those things are obvious. But living by the Spirit will result in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. There's no law against those things!
Thursday, March 25, 2010
NT Journey--Galatians 4
Growing Up
In Galatians 4, Paul continues the conversation about the Law and the promise. I'll try to explain it further with an example I think you'll understand.
When we go on long trips and bring our kids with us, there will inevitably be a "situation" arise. We have three kids and inevitably, two of them will have to sit next to each other. On a long car-ride, they will eventually get bored so the pastime of choice is "pick on your sister." So the boy will just start touching his sister and of course, she will scream like she's dying. When I figure out what's going on, I'll say to the boy, "stop touching your sister!"...and he will agree.
But then the girl will start screaming again and I'll look back to find him putting his hand as close to her face as humanly possible without actually touching her. Of course, this is twice as annoying and even though it's technically obeying what I said, he's not actually obeying. Some day, these are the people that will inherit everything I have. Whether I can trust them with what I have at this point is doubtful. When they grow up, however, I hope it'll be different.
This is why with children, we have to be very specific with our rules, they don't necessarily understand the "spirit of the law." Children have to be under the Law. Paul is saying that the Law was there because the Israelites were still children. They had to live by the letter of the Law, but what God desired was the Spirit. Even though people are heirs to God's inheritance, they needed to grow up before they can fully realize it. Faith is Law all grown up.
In Paul's day, slaves and children were treated the same way. The difference is that some day the children would receive the inheritance--slaves never would. Paul was saying that the Jews who wanted to continue to follow the Law, didn't understand they were children, not slaves.
Some day, I hope my kids will understand the spirit of the law is to care about and respect each other, not just technically follow the rules. That's why Jesus spent so much time in His ministry teaching people how to get beyond the Law and to the spirit. When they get this, I can be confident they will handle their inheritance in the way I would--a way that honors God and helps others.
The same thing had to happen with Israel (and Gentiles, too). God has an inheritance he wants to give--freedom and abundant life. But before it could be realized He needed to know that people would be able to handle it the way He does.
I think this same principle applies not just to Jews, but also to Christians. Sometimes we can get so caught up being religious that we miss the spirit of Jesus. As children of the promise, we should understand that the Gospel is the blessing God promised through Abraham. We can help fulfill that blessing when we live like Jesus and spread the Word. Freedom! Real abundant live! What more could anyone want?
In Galatians 4, Paul continues the conversation about the Law and the promise. I'll try to explain it further with an example I think you'll understand.
When we go on long trips and bring our kids with us, there will inevitably be a "situation" arise. We have three kids and inevitably, two of them will have to sit next to each other. On a long car-ride, they will eventually get bored so the pastime of choice is "pick on your sister." So the boy will just start touching his sister and of course, she will scream like she's dying. When I figure out what's going on, I'll say to the boy, "stop touching your sister!"...and he will agree.
But then the girl will start screaming again and I'll look back to find him putting his hand as close to her face as humanly possible without actually touching her. Of course, this is twice as annoying and even though it's technically obeying what I said, he's not actually obeying. Some day, these are the people that will inherit everything I have. Whether I can trust them with what I have at this point is doubtful. When they grow up, however, I hope it'll be different.
This is why with children, we have to be very specific with our rules, they don't necessarily understand the "spirit of the law." Children have to be under the Law. Paul is saying that the Law was there because the Israelites were still children. They had to live by the letter of the Law, but what God desired was the Spirit. Even though people are heirs to God's inheritance, they needed to grow up before they can fully realize it. Faith is Law all grown up.
In Paul's day, slaves and children were treated the same way. The difference is that some day the children would receive the inheritance--slaves never would. Paul was saying that the Jews who wanted to continue to follow the Law, didn't understand they were children, not slaves.
Some day, I hope my kids will understand the spirit of the law is to care about and respect each other, not just technically follow the rules. That's why Jesus spent so much time in His ministry teaching people how to get beyond the Law and to the spirit. When they get this, I can be confident they will handle their inheritance in the way I would--a way that honors God and helps others.
The same thing had to happen with Israel (and Gentiles, too). God has an inheritance he wants to give--freedom and abundant life. But before it could be realized He needed to know that people would be able to handle it the way He does.
I think this same principle applies not just to Jews, but also to Christians. Sometimes we can get so caught up being religious that we miss the spirit of Jesus. As children of the promise, we should understand that the Gospel is the blessing God promised through Abraham. We can help fulfill that blessing when we live like Jesus and spread the Word. Freedom! Real abundant live! What more could anyone want?
NT Journey--Galatians 3
About Covenants
When you read in Galatians, it's helpful to understand covenants. In Old Testament times, covenants were a regular part of daily life. We have covenants today. The covenant that is most similar to what they had back then is the marriage covenant. In fact, some of the traditions we and ritual we have are similar to the rituals they used in the Ancient near east.
The Bible itself is divided into the Old Covenant (Testament) and the New Covenant (Testament). The God of the Bible is a God who makes covenants. Why? Love. God certainly didn't NEED to make covenants, but a covenant was the way people could understand love because when you make a covenant with someone, you make yourself subject to them. What advantage could God gain by making a covenant with any person? Nothing, of course. God doesn't need anything from us, but He did it anyway, which makes His covenants one-sided--He gives up a lot, we give up very little.
Here, Paul is talking about two different covenants--the Mosaic Covenant (or the one given to Moses with the Ten Commandments) and the Abrahamic Covenant (or the one given to Abraham in Genesis 18:18). What Paul is doing here is explaining the two different covenants.
In Galatians, we've talked a lot about "the Law." What we're talking about is the Law of Moses or the "Mosaic Covenant." When God made a covenant with Israel through Moses, it was a two-sided covenant. In essence, God said, "IF you do this, I will do this." In Moses' case, God said, "I will protect you and Israel and you will be my people IF you follow the Law I give you." That Law was only for the Jews--only for the nation of Israel.
430 years earlier, God had made a covenant with Abraham. In the middle of the book of Genesis, God tells Abraham to leave his home town of Ur (in modern-day Iraq) and move to Palestine (modern-day Israel). Because Abraham obeyed, God made his covenant with Abram. All Abraham had to do is to circumcise all male children in his clan as a sign of the covenant. God's part of the bargain comes in Genesis 18:18 where He says, "Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him."
So here's the difference between the two covenants. The covenant with Moses was for the protection of Israel and was dependent on Israel's obedience). The covenant with Abraham was given so that "all the nations of the earth will be blessed," and does not depend on Israel's obedience, but was made as a result of Abraham's obedience and given as a promise. The blessing, God is talking about is Jesus. Jesus is the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham and all the earth is blessed because of Jesus.
Paul continues the discussion in chapter 4 and I think it will begin to make more sense once we get there. For now, it's helpful to understand the difference Paul is making between the two covenants. More to come...
When you read in Galatians, it's helpful to understand covenants. In Old Testament times, covenants were a regular part of daily life. We have covenants today. The covenant that is most similar to what they had back then is the marriage covenant. In fact, some of the traditions we and ritual we have are similar to the rituals they used in the Ancient near east.
The Bible itself is divided into the Old Covenant (Testament) and the New Covenant (Testament). The God of the Bible is a God who makes covenants. Why? Love. God certainly didn't NEED to make covenants, but a covenant was the way people could understand love because when you make a covenant with someone, you make yourself subject to them. What advantage could God gain by making a covenant with any person? Nothing, of course. God doesn't need anything from us, but He did it anyway, which makes His covenants one-sided--He gives up a lot, we give up very little.
Here, Paul is talking about two different covenants--the Mosaic Covenant (or the one given to Moses with the Ten Commandments) and the Abrahamic Covenant (or the one given to Abraham in Genesis 18:18). What Paul is doing here is explaining the two different covenants.
In Galatians, we've talked a lot about "the Law." What we're talking about is the Law of Moses or the "Mosaic Covenant." When God made a covenant with Israel through Moses, it was a two-sided covenant. In essence, God said, "IF you do this, I will do this." In Moses' case, God said, "I will protect you and Israel and you will be my people IF you follow the Law I give you." That Law was only for the Jews--only for the nation of Israel.
430 years earlier, God had made a covenant with Abraham. In the middle of the book of Genesis, God tells Abraham to leave his home town of Ur (in modern-day Iraq) and move to Palestine (modern-day Israel). Because Abraham obeyed, God made his covenant with Abram. All Abraham had to do is to circumcise all male children in his clan as a sign of the covenant. God's part of the bargain comes in Genesis 18:18 where He says, "Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him."
So here's the difference between the two covenants. The covenant with Moses was for the protection of Israel and was dependent on Israel's obedience). The covenant with Abraham was given so that "all the nations of the earth will be blessed," and does not depend on Israel's obedience, but was made as a result of Abraham's obedience and given as a promise. The blessing, God is talking about is Jesus. Jesus is the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham and all the earth is blessed because of Jesus.
Paul continues the discussion in chapter 4 and I think it will begin to make more sense once we get there. For now, it's helpful to understand the difference Paul is making between the two covenants. More to come...
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
NT Journey--Galatians 2
Read Carefully
In Galatians 2, Paul continues to defend himself against the accusations of the Judaizers. As he does, he talks about his interactions with the Disciples (I'll use capital "D" when I'm talking about Jesus' 12 Disciples because besides Paul, they are the ones who were entrusted with Jesus' teachings, so they carry a lot of weight in the church). Essentially, Paul is saying he's "running with the big dogs."
What I want to point out today, however is the importance of really studying something you don't quite understand. When Paul writes, he can tend to use a lot of words and see to tie up literary knots. I think we see an example in chapter 2 of this. It took me a few readings to try to figure out what Paul was saying. We will definitely run into more passages like this in Paul's letter, so let's take a look at it and hopefully this exercise will help you when you come to another difficult passage.
What I'm referring to is verse 19 where Paul says, "through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God." Strange and difficult use of words here, but let's break it down. "Through the law, I died to the law..." The Law is about earning. So let's take high school as an example. Let's say you want to get into Harvard and in order to get into Harvard, you have to get straight "A"s all through high school. If you get even one B, Harvard is no longer an option.
If it's your great desire to get into Harvard and no other school will do, you will make yourself a slave to studying. You'll do anything you can to achieve those "A"s. Most likely, it'll make the rest of your life pretty much non-existent because you'll spend so much time studying to make sure you get those grades. The problem is that if at any point you get a "B", you die to Harvard--it's no longer an option. Then everything you've worked for is down the drain. Those were the requirements of Harvard and you didn't match up.
But what if someone told you that Harvard wasn't the pinnacle--that there are greater things to attain to than getting into Harvard? What's more, the greater, more fulfilling thing isn't predicated on studying all the time and always getting the right answer. What's this more fulfilling goal? It's having great relationships, it's being who God created you to be! Sure getting good grades is nice, but when you always have to get straight "A"s it becomes the sole focus of your life. But when you "die to Harvard," you gain freedom to do what you should have been doing all along.
That Paul describing grace. The Law is set up so that if you break any of it, you're guilty. It doesn't matter what the sin is, you're guilty and deserve punishment. But Paul says that the Law was never really intended to save people, it was only intended to show us all that it's impossible to live up to God's standards. It's only when we give up on working for those impossible standards and live in the grace of Jesus that we can really be who we are created to be.
Then it comes to one of my favorite verses, Galatians 2:20, "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." When I follow Jesus, the Law takes on no significance for me. I no longer have to worry about all the details, but I can focus on what's more fulfilling--reconciliation. First, God and me, then others and me. And as a bonus, I get the privilege of helping others get free of the law and free to live for God.
Now, you might anticipate a problem with this idea of freedom and being dead to the Law. If we don't have to follow the Law, can't we just do anything we want? If sin is of no account, then why not make the rest of life a party? Paul knew grace could easily be misunderstood this way, and we'll see how he addresses it later in the book of Galatians.
In Galatians 2, Paul continues to defend himself against the accusations of the Judaizers. As he does, he talks about his interactions with the Disciples (I'll use capital "D" when I'm talking about Jesus' 12 Disciples because besides Paul, they are the ones who were entrusted with Jesus' teachings, so they carry a lot of weight in the church). Essentially, Paul is saying he's "running with the big dogs."
What I want to point out today, however is the importance of really studying something you don't quite understand. When Paul writes, he can tend to use a lot of words and see to tie up literary knots. I think we see an example in chapter 2 of this. It took me a few readings to try to figure out what Paul was saying. We will definitely run into more passages like this in Paul's letter, so let's take a look at it and hopefully this exercise will help you when you come to another difficult passage.
What I'm referring to is verse 19 where Paul says, "through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God." Strange and difficult use of words here, but let's break it down. "Through the law, I died to the law..." The Law is about earning. So let's take high school as an example. Let's say you want to get into Harvard and in order to get into Harvard, you have to get straight "A"s all through high school. If you get even one B, Harvard is no longer an option.
If it's your great desire to get into Harvard and no other school will do, you will make yourself a slave to studying. You'll do anything you can to achieve those "A"s. Most likely, it'll make the rest of your life pretty much non-existent because you'll spend so much time studying to make sure you get those grades. The problem is that if at any point you get a "B", you die to Harvard--it's no longer an option. Then everything you've worked for is down the drain. Those were the requirements of Harvard and you didn't match up.
But what if someone told you that Harvard wasn't the pinnacle--that there are greater things to attain to than getting into Harvard? What's more, the greater, more fulfilling thing isn't predicated on studying all the time and always getting the right answer. What's this more fulfilling goal? It's having great relationships, it's being who God created you to be! Sure getting good grades is nice, but when you always have to get straight "A"s it becomes the sole focus of your life. But when you "die to Harvard," you gain freedom to do what you should have been doing all along.
That Paul describing grace. The Law is set up so that if you break any of it, you're guilty. It doesn't matter what the sin is, you're guilty and deserve punishment. But Paul says that the Law was never really intended to save people, it was only intended to show us all that it's impossible to live up to God's standards. It's only when we give up on working for those impossible standards and live in the grace of Jesus that we can really be who we are created to be.
Then it comes to one of my favorite verses, Galatians 2:20, "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." When I follow Jesus, the Law takes on no significance for me. I no longer have to worry about all the details, but I can focus on what's more fulfilling--reconciliation. First, God and me, then others and me. And as a bonus, I get the privilege of helping others get free of the law and free to live for God.
Now, you might anticipate a problem with this idea of freedom and being dead to the Law. If we don't have to follow the Law, can't we just do anything we want? If sin is of no account, then why not make the rest of life a party? Paul knew grace could easily be misunderstood this way, and we'll see how he addresses it later in the book of Galatians.
Monday, March 22, 2010
NT Journey--Galatians 1
The Power of Character
The book of Galatians has a different greeting than all of Paul's other letters. Typically, when Paul writes to a church or a group of churches, he will send warm greetings and let them know, first of all how he's praying for them and how he thanks God for them. In Galatians we see no such greeting--Paul gets right down to business.
He does introduce himself, but then goes right into the subject at hand. If you were writing a letter, what kind of mood would make you most likely to skip the kind greeting? Anger, of course. Paul is steaming mad. Paul had been at the different churches in the province of Galatia, preaching the Gospel of grace--that it's not by human effort or following the Law that people are saved, but it's through faith in Jesus Christ, who died so the we can live.
But when Paul left the various churches, he received word that there were some "Judaizers" (Jewish Christians who believed you had to follow the Jewish Law even when you have faith in Christ.) coming in behind him and undoing all the work he had done.
It seems that one of the first things the Judaizers do is to question Paul's character and credentials. We know this because of the great deal of time Paul spends defending himself. In verse 1, he defends himself by telling them he was sent by Jesus Himself, not by men. He then spends verses 11-24 explaining his story and why they should accept his authority to preach this Gospel of grace. He tells the story of his conversion as well as his interaction with Jesus' disciples, who would automatically have authority in the church.
In other places in the New Testament, Paul does acknowledge that the path he took to be an Apostle was different than the other Apostles (Peter, James, John, etc.) His path was different because he wasn't actually on of Jesus' twelve disciples. He was only called to be an Apostle after Jesus had already ascended, so it would carry weight with the Galatian believers that he did, at some point go and spend some time with Peter. Paul wants to make it clear, however that he was preaching long before he spent any time with Peter. Peter only acknowledged that Paul was an apostle, he didn't tell him to go preach, making him a "junior apostle." He was a full-on Apostle with a capital "A."
Paul is angry with the Galatians because they seem to be buying in to the Judaizers "other gospel." Paul figures that they should have known that the message the Judaizers were preaching was contrary to the Gospel of Jesus that Paul preached to them. The tone of the letter will stay quite stern and Paul will continue to defend himself against the charges of the Judaizers as we continue through Galatians. It won't take long, so work hard to understand what's going on here.
The book of Galatians has a different greeting than all of Paul's other letters. Typically, when Paul writes to a church or a group of churches, he will send warm greetings and let them know, first of all how he's praying for them and how he thanks God for them. In Galatians we see no such greeting--Paul gets right down to business.
He does introduce himself, but then goes right into the subject at hand. If you were writing a letter, what kind of mood would make you most likely to skip the kind greeting? Anger, of course. Paul is steaming mad. Paul had been at the different churches in the province of Galatia, preaching the Gospel of grace--that it's not by human effort or following the Law that people are saved, but it's through faith in Jesus Christ, who died so the we can live.
But when Paul left the various churches, he received word that there were some "Judaizers" (Jewish Christians who believed you had to follow the Jewish Law even when you have faith in Christ.) coming in behind him and undoing all the work he had done.
It seems that one of the first things the Judaizers do is to question Paul's character and credentials. We know this because of the great deal of time Paul spends defending himself. In verse 1, he defends himself by telling them he was sent by Jesus Himself, not by men. He then spends verses 11-24 explaining his story and why they should accept his authority to preach this Gospel of grace. He tells the story of his conversion as well as his interaction with Jesus' disciples, who would automatically have authority in the church.
In other places in the New Testament, Paul does acknowledge that the path he took to be an Apostle was different than the other Apostles (Peter, James, John, etc.) His path was different because he wasn't actually on of Jesus' twelve disciples. He was only called to be an Apostle after Jesus had already ascended, so it would carry weight with the Galatian believers that he did, at some point go and spend some time with Peter. Paul wants to make it clear, however that he was preaching long before he spent any time with Peter. Peter only acknowledged that Paul was an apostle, he didn't tell him to go preach, making him a "junior apostle." He was a full-on Apostle with a capital "A."
Paul is angry with the Galatians because they seem to be buying in to the Judaizers "other gospel." Paul figures that they should have known that the message the Judaizers were preaching was contrary to the Gospel of Jesus that Paul preached to them. The tone of the letter will stay quite stern and Paul will continue to defend himself against the charges of the Judaizers as we continue through Galatians. It won't take long, so work hard to understand what's going on here.
Friday, March 19, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 28
An Abrupt Ending
As we come to the end of the book of Acts, I'm interested to hear what you thought of it. I'm sure many of you had never read through the book of Acts or had known anything about the culture behind the stories. As you read Acts in that light, what are your thoughts?
The book of Acts ends rather abruptly. We never hear what happens to Paul. You may wonder why. Ultimately, we don't really know why Acts doesn't chronicle the rest of the story. We might guess that Theophilus, to whom the book of Acts is addressed already knows the rest of the story. Maybe, he was wondering why Paul was executed. In any case, we do know from Christian tradition that Paul was eventually executed--most believe under the reign of Nero.
I am continually amazed at Paul's attitude throughout his entire ministry. Despite the fact that he faced incredible trials and opposition, he stayed the course and never failed to preach the Gospel when given the opportunity. Most of us never preach the Gospel even when facing no persecution or opposition. We can learn a great deal from Paul and the way he carried himself in difficult situations. We'll learn more about this when we read through Philippians. Even when in prison accused of stirring up riots because of the Gospel, he continues to preach with abandon, and finishes the race in a fitting manner.
As we come to the end of the book of Acts, I'm interested to hear what you thought of it. I'm sure many of you had never read through the book of Acts or had known anything about the culture behind the stories. As you read Acts in that light, what are your thoughts?
The book of Acts ends rather abruptly. We never hear what happens to Paul. You may wonder why. Ultimately, we don't really know why Acts doesn't chronicle the rest of the story. We might guess that Theophilus, to whom the book of Acts is addressed already knows the rest of the story. Maybe, he was wondering why Paul was executed. In any case, we do know from Christian tradition that Paul was eventually executed--most believe under the reign of Nero.
I am continually amazed at Paul's attitude throughout his entire ministry. Despite the fact that he faced incredible trials and opposition, he stayed the course and never failed to preach the Gospel when given the opportunity. Most of us never preach the Gospel even when facing no persecution or opposition. We can learn a great deal from Paul and the way he carried himself in difficult situations. We'll learn more about this when we read through Philippians. Even when in prison accused of stirring up riots because of the Gospel, he continues to preach with abandon, and finishes the race in a fitting manner.
NT Journey--Preparing for Galatians
Preparing for Galatians
I hope you've enjoyed the book of Acts. I find it to be very exhilarating to read and learn how the church first began. I can very easily be drawn in to the story of how the Gospel spread to the whole world! Most of what we read from now on will be letters that were written during the time the book of Acts chronicles. As we read these letters, try to remember back to what you read in Acts and what you know of the different cities Peter and Paul visited. There are many things you'll see in these letters that find a correlation in Acts.
It's always helpful to learn a bit about any book of the Bible you're about to study. Every study Bible will provide you with details about the author, the date, the situation, and the audience. It's always helpful to know the situation, but the book of Galatians might be the epitome of situational writing. In order to understand what Paul is writing, it's essential that we understand what's going on and the themes involved.
The book of Galatians was the earliest book written by the Apostle Paul. In fact, most scholars believe it was the earliest book in the New Testament, written somewhere between 48 and 53 A.D. The themes Galatians deals with are the themes you would expect for a book written while the new Church, which was mostly Jews.
What's happening is that as Paul starts or visits existing churches and preaches the Gospel of grace through faith, some Jewish Christians (called Judaizers) are coming in behind Paul and preaching a different message. Paul's message was that people didn't need to follow the Jewish Law in order to follow Jesus. If they had faith in Jesus, circumcision, sacrifices, and dietary laws are not necessary. It is by grace we have been saved, not through works. In Galatians 5, Paul writes, "It is for freedom that Christ has set you free, so do not let yourselves be burdened by a yoke of slavery..."
The tone of the book is very stern. It's the only letter Paul writes that doesn't include a friendly greeting. Paul is MAD and it shows.
In the letter, Paul talks a great deal about circumcision. For people who aren't familiar with the Old Testament, this may be a bit confusing. For us, circumcision is a health issue. For the Jews it was an issue of obedience. Every Jewish boy (and male Jewish converts) had to be circumcised as a sign of their obedience to God's laws. This is why in the New Testament, we find a great deal of "God fearers." These are men that believed the message of the Jews, but for obvious reasons were hesitant to go all the way to observe the Law. So circumcision in Galatians represents following the Law.
In Galatians we hear a lot about freedom. Paul knew that the Gospel of grace would be easy to pervert and be used to justify sinful behavior. Yet grace is so valuable, it's worth the risk.
I hope you've enjoyed the book of Acts. I find it to be very exhilarating to read and learn how the church first began. I can very easily be drawn in to the story of how the Gospel spread to the whole world! Most of what we read from now on will be letters that were written during the time the book of Acts chronicles. As we read these letters, try to remember back to what you read in Acts and what you know of the different cities Peter and Paul visited. There are many things you'll see in these letters that find a correlation in Acts.
It's always helpful to learn a bit about any book of the Bible you're about to study. Every study Bible will provide you with details about the author, the date, the situation, and the audience. It's always helpful to know the situation, but the book of Galatians might be the epitome of situational writing. In order to understand what Paul is writing, it's essential that we understand what's going on and the themes involved.
The book of Galatians was the earliest book written by the Apostle Paul. In fact, most scholars believe it was the earliest book in the New Testament, written somewhere between 48 and 53 A.D. The themes Galatians deals with are the themes you would expect for a book written while the new Church, which was mostly Jews.
What's happening is that as Paul starts or visits existing churches and preaches the Gospel of grace through faith, some Jewish Christians (called Judaizers) are coming in behind Paul and preaching a different message. Paul's message was that people didn't need to follow the Jewish Law in order to follow Jesus. If they had faith in Jesus, circumcision, sacrifices, and dietary laws are not necessary. It is by grace we have been saved, not through works. In Galatians 5, Paul writes, "It is for freedom that Christ has set you free, so do not let yourselves be burdened by a yoke of slavery..."
The tone of the book is very stern. It's the only letter Paul writes that doesn't include a friendly greeting. Paul is MAD and it shows.
In the letter, Paul talks a great deal about circumcision. For people who aren't familiar with the Old Testament, this may be a bit confusing. For us, circumcision is a health issue. For the Jews it was an issue of obedience. Every Jewish boy (and male Jewish converts) had to be circumcised as a sign of their obedience to God's laws. This is why in the New Testament, we find a great deal of "God fearers." These are men that believed the message of the Jews, but for obvious reasons were hesitant to go all the way to observe the Law. So circumcision in Galatians represents following the Law.
In Galatians we hear a lot about freedom. Paul knew that the Gospel of grace would be easy to pervert and be used to justify sinful behavior. Yet grace is so valuable, it's worth the risk.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 27
Mutual Respect
What's most interesting to me about Acts 27 is the respect that everyone has for each other, even in the middle of difficult circumstances. Paul is being taken to Rome as a prisoner of the Empire, yet the centurion, Julius who is in charge of Paul, has such respect for him that he gives him a great amount of freedom. When they go to territory familiar to Paul, they allow his friends to come and attend to his needs. For all Julius knows, Paul's friends are thugs that will take him into hiding, but Julius doesn't seem concerned about that, despite the fact that the Roman Empire didn't have a network of computers that would put Paul's face all over the Empire before he could get ten miles down the road. What was it about Paul that made Julius trust him?
Paul didn't disappoint. In fact, as they were traveling, he showed a great amount of care and concern for the people who were taking him to prison. When he had the chance to escape, he stayed. When he had the opportunity to give false advice, he told the truth. He encouraged the crew even though he knew they would end up shipwrecked. What kind of prisoner looks out for the well-being of his captors? One who knew Jesus very well, that's who.
Isn't this the very thing Jesus would have done? When Paul gets to Rome, he will sit under house arrest for at least a couple of years. During that time, he will pen his letter to the Philippians, where he will write:
I was at the drive-thru yesterday and was just pulling up to the window, when a young woman, who had just been in the drive-thru, threw her car in reverse and rolled down her window and proceeded to yell at the window attendant. The workers got her order wrong and she was not happy. They asked her to pull into a parking spot and they would bring out her correct order. She tore into the spot and I soon saw, what I assume to be the incorrect order fly out the window and scatter all over the parking lot.
While we might not react with such venom, how often do we have the same attitude about the small things in life that go wrong? How quick are we to complain and behave in unChristlike ways because we think we deserve more than what we received? Paul, in Acts 27 is a great example for us to follow when things are not going our way.
What's most interesting to me about Acts 27 is the respect that everyone has for each other, even in the middle of difficult circumstances. Paul is being taken to Rome as a prisoner of the Empire, yet the centurion, Julius who is in charge of Paul, has such respect for him that he gives him a great amount of freedom. When they go to territory familiar to Paul, they allow his friends to come and attend to his needs. For all Julius knows, Paul's friends are thugs that will take him into hiding, but Julius doesn't seem concerned about that, despite the fact that the Roman Empire didn't have a network of computers that would put Paul's face all over the Empire before he could get ten miles down the road. What was it about Paul that made Julius trust him?
Paul didn't disappoint. In fact, as they were traveling, he showed a great amount of care and concern for the people who were taking him to prison. When he had the chance to escape, he stayed. When he had the opportunity to give false advice, he told the truth. He encouraged the crew even though he knew they would end up shipwrecked. What kind of prisoner looks out for the well-being of his captors? One who knew Jesus very well, that's who.
Isn't this the very thing Jesus would have done? When Paul gets to Rome, he will sit under house arrest for at least a couple of years. During that time, he will pen his letter to the Philippians, where he will write:
14Do everything without complaining or arguing, 15so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe 16as you hold out the word of life—in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing. 17But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you. 18So you too should be glad and rejoice with me.Paul knew his circumstances were dire, yet was single-mindedly focused on his goal--sharing Jesus with the Gentiles. So no matter his situation, he saw it as an opportunity to represent Christ, even when the people around him were his captors.
I was at the drive-thru yesterday and was just pulling up to the window, when a young woman, who had just been in the drive-thru, threw her car in reverse and rolled down her window and proceeded to yell at the window attendant. The workers got her order wrong and she was not happy. They asked her to pull into a parking spot and they would bring out her correct order. She tore into the spot and I soon saw, what I assume to be the incorrect order fly out the window and scatter all over the parking lot.
While we might not react with such venom, how often do we have the same attitude about the small things in life that go wrong? How quick are we to complain and behave in unChristlike ways because we think we deserve more than what we received? Paul, in Acts 27 is a great example for us to follow when things are not going our way.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 26
This Guy is Crazy!
In Acts 26, Paul is still in the "system." Festus has heard Paul's appeal to Caesar and decides to consult King Agrippa as long as he's in town. Unlike Felix and Festus, Agrippa was a Jew. He was part of the Herodians who were chosen by Rome to rule the Jews. So Agrippa was familiar with Jewish teachings, but who knows how much he actually practiced Jewish religion. Most likely, though Agrippa was Jewish by birth, he lived more like a Roman.
But Paul is still able to appeal to him as a Jew. In fact, Paul really takes less time defending himself and more time telling Agrippa the Gospel. At one point, Festus interrupts saying Paul is crazy. The thought of life after death is silly to Festus. Agrippa knows what Paul is doing and so mocks him in a sense, "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?"
In any case, both Festus and Agrippa know that Paul really hasn't done anything wrong, but since he has appealed to Caesar, he has to go there. His trip to Rome turns out to be quite an adventure.
In Acts 26, Paul is still in the "system." Festus has heard Paul's appeal to Caesar and decides to consult King Agrippa as long as he's in town. Unlike Felix and Festus, Agrippa was a Jew. He was part of the Herodians who were chosen by Rome to rule the Jews. So Agrippa was familiar with Jewish teachings, but who knows how much he actually practiced Jewish religion. Most likely, though Agrippa was Jewish by birth, he lived more like a Roman.
But Paul is still able to appeal to him as a Jew. In fact, Paul really takes less time defending himself and more time telling Agrippa the Gospel. At one point, Festus interrupts saying Paul is crazy. The thought of life after death is silly to Festus. Agrippa knows what Paul is doing and so mocks him in a sense, "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?"
In any case, both Festus and Agrippa know that Paul really hasn't done anything wrong, but since he has appealed to Caesar, he has to go there. His trip to Rome turns out to be quite an adventure.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 25
On His Way to Rome
Acts 25 presents us with some interesting irony. If you spend any time in the Old Testament--especially in the prophets, you will find a great deal there about how much God loves justice. But the justice He loves is not contrived justice, but real, actual justice. In fact, God's care for the poor, widow, orphan, alien, and anyone who is not in power plays a large role in why Israel was seen as being disobedient. For instance, a verse in Micah 6:
The iron I see here is that the Jews are seemingly more concerned about their religious rules and the "purity of the Temple" than they are about Paul. Even if they think he's doing something wrong--they're not about to try to redeem him and his variant beliefs, they just plot to kill him. So Paul's last resort is to appeal to Caesar. Do you see the iron in this? In order to receive justice, Paul has to appeal to the pagans!
This reminds me a a passage Paul himself wrote to the Corinthian church.
But as believers, we can trust that God will judge fairly and with mercy, so we can just leave it up to Him. That takes a lot of pressure off.
So Paul would rather stand trial before pagans than to be released to "God's chosen people." Ultimately, it ends the same way in Rome that it would have in Jerusalem--with Paul's execution, but at least in Rome, Paul will have a couple more good years of ministry.
Acts 25 presents us with some interesting irony. If you spend any time in the Old Testament--especially in the prophets, you will find a great deal there about how much God loves justice. But the justice He loves is not contrived justice, but real, actual justice. In fact, God's care for the poor, widow, orphan, alien, and anyone who is not in power plays a large role in why Israel was seen as being disobedient. For instance, a verse in Micah 6:
7 Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams,What He's saying here is that all the religious rituals and sacrifices mean nothing to God if the people don't love mercy and justice. I could show you many other examples of the same thing, but let this one example suffice.
with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
8 He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.
The iron I see here is that the Jews are seemingly more concerned about their religious rules and the "purity of the Temple" than they are about Paul. Even if they think he's doing something wrong--they're not about to try to redeem him and his variant beliefs, they just plot to kill him. So Paul's last resort is to appeal to Caesar. Do you see the iron in this? In order to receive justice, Paul has to appeal to the pagans!
This reminds me a a passage Paul himself wrote to the Corinthian church.
1If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!Paul is astonished that the Christian believers look to the pagans to resolve disputes among themselves. As Christians, we should be level-headed, concerned with justice and peace, but instead we are often divisive and unreasonable. It's as if we see ourselves as the judge.
But as believers, we can trust that God will judge fairly and with mercy, so we can just leave it up to Him. That takes a lot of pressure off.
So Paul would rather stand trial before pagans than to be released to "God's chosen people." Ultimately, it ends the same way in Rome that it would have in Jerusalem--with Paul's execution, but at least in Rome, Paul will have a couple more good years of ministry.
NT Journey--Acts 24
Not Much to Say
In Acts 24, there's not a whole lot of new things happening. Paul was taken to Caesarea to be safe from the Jews in Jerusalem. Caesarea was a Roman city, so it had a large contingent of Roman military and was the closest place where they could assure Paul's safety--something they were concerned about because Paul was a Roman citizen.
You can see that Felix was not really all that concerned about Paul being a big trouble-maker because he gives Paul and his friends a good amount of freedom, even though he's technically in their custody. As I have mentioned earlier, the way the Roman's governed other people groups within the Empire was to not mettle too much in their affairs (or even care that much about them) unless there was a potential rebellion on the horizon.
At the same time, you can also see how leery the Romans were of the powder keg called Jerusalem. The Jews were difficult to rule because they were so passionate about their religion, so while Felix knew Paul really wasn't guilty of anything, he still kept him in prison for almost two years, just because he didn't know what to do with him.
In Acts 24, there's not a whole lot of new things happening. Paul was taken to Caesarea to be safe from the Jews in Jerusalem. Caesarea was a Roman city, so it had a large contingent of Roman military and was the closest place where they could assure Paul's safety--something they were concerned about because Paul was a Roman citizen.
You can see that Felix was not really all that concerned about Paul being a big trouble-maker because he gives Paul and his friends a good amount of freedom, even though he's technically in their custody. As I have mentioned earlier, the way the Roman's governed other people groups within the Empire was to not mettle too much in their affairs (or even care that much about them) unless there was a potential rebellion on the horizon.
At the same time, you can also see how leery the Romans were of the powder keg called Jerusalem. The Jews were difficult to rule because they were so passionate about their religion, so while Felix knew Paul really wasn't guilty of anything, he still kept him in prison for almost two years, just because he didn't know what to do with him.
Friday, March 12, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 23
The Saga Continues.
At this point Acts begins to read like a Hollywood movie. Paul tries to reason with the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin is the council of the Jewish elders, led by the high priest. Remember that in those days, there was no such concept as "separation of church and state," so the judgments rendered by the Sanhedrin were binding not just on religious life, but also on social and political life as well. To the Sanhedrin, Paul was not just a religious trouble-maker, but also a threat to Jewish society.
In Acts 22, Paul spent a good amount of time trying to convince the Jews that he was a Jew who still followed the Jewish law himself, even if he did not require it of the Gentiles. But in Acts 23, he commits a huge error when he insults the chief priest--which no good Jew would do. In the exchange, he tells them he didn't realize it was the chief priest, which many commentators indicate might have to do with Paul's poor eyesight. It's hard for me to believe Paul would not have known it was the high priest who was presiding over the assembly since Paul knew it was the Sanhedrin.
Instead, I believe Paul was actually being belligerent, essentially saying a true high priest wouldn't act this way. At that point, Paul showed he didn't respect the authority of the high priest or the Sanhedrin and essentially sealed his fate as far as they were concerned.
He tries to get out of it by creating a squabble between the Pharisees and the Sadducees about resurrection (they're so predictable). Then some of the Pharisees even stand up for Paul, but it was too late. He deserved too much hatred up to this point. Again, he has to be rescued by the Roman commander. A group of Jews plotted to kill Paul, but Paul finds out about the plot and eludes the plot by being transferred to Caesarea, which is a port city on the Mediterranean Sea.
When we read the Bible, we should get over the idea that we can always find a direct application in everything we read. Not everything in the Bible was meant to be applied, some of it is just to help paint the picture. We'll oftentimes use people we know the Bible portrays as good or righteous and just emulate everything they do. So in this story for instance, we shouldn't take Paul's disrespect toward the high priest as license to disrespect our leaders even if we think they deserve it. Maybe Paul was OK to do it, but it's not really portrayed as the thing to do in this story.
That being said, throughout Matthew and Acts, there is one thing we see as a pattern. We're looking at the big picture here rather than trying to find meaning in every little detail (though sometimes we can do that). The question that was raised for me after reading this chapter was this: How can we, as believers live out an undying passion for Jesus without becoming unreasonable and closed-minded like the Pharisees with Jesus and the Jews in general with Paul.
On the one hand, we can respect their steadfastness in what they believe. On the other hand, it doesn't take a genius to see there's something wrong with this picture. Should the Jewish leaders have seen the Truth? Should it have been so obvious to them that they should believe in Jesus or what Paul was saying? All throughout history, we see examples of this not just from Jews, but also from Christians.
So we have a dilemma. We want to remain steadfast and true to our faith, but not resort to the kind of antics we see in Acts 22 and 23. You could say, the Jews in Ephesus (earlier in Acts) and in Jerusalem were fundamentalists. There's something appealing about being a fundamentalist. They're committed. They study very hard and know what they're talking about (at least from their particular point of view). They stick with the fundamentals. So what's the problem?
I've heard one pastor describe it like this: The problem with Christian fundamentalists is not that they are fundamental, it's that they aren't fundamental enough about the right things. So in the case of the Jews, we might find some precedent in the Old Testament for them to behave the way they did. After all, the Law was strict and ruthless--and so were the religious leaders.
But as Christians, what we are called to be fundamental about is Jesus. When all else fails (and even when it doesn't) we go straight to Jesus. We are to be fundamental about being like Christ. Now Jesus was no pushover. Other people did not control Him, but His way was not about power and separation, but about self-sacrifice and reconciliation. He was ruthless about self-sacrifice and caring for people--especially sinners and people who were far from Him. You would have never found Him arguing that people should adhere more to the fine, points of the Law. You would find Him teaching about the heart of the matter.
That's what religious fundamentalists don't get--they care more about the law than the people the law was intended to serve. Love is a more demanding law. Love doesn't allow us to get off on technicalities. Grace is messy. Self-sacrifice is hard. But ultimately, if we want to be "fundamental" about true Christianity, these are the things we need to study and take to heart.
At this point Acts begins to read like a Hollywood movie. Paul tries to reason with the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin is the council of the Jewish elders, led by the high priest. Remember that in those days, there was no such concept as "separation of church and state," so the judgments rendered by the Sanhedrin were binding not just on religious life, but also on social and political life as well. To the Sanhedrin, Paul was not just a religious trouble-maker, but also a threat to Jewish society.
In Acts 22, Paul spent a good amount of time trying to convince the Jews that he was a Jew who still followed the Jewish law himself, even if he did not require it of the Gentiles. But in Acts 23, he commits a huge error when he insults the chief priest--which no good Jew would do. In the exchange, he tells them he didn't realize it was the chief priest, which many commentators indicate might have to do with Paul's poor eyesight. It's hard for me to believe Paul would not have known it was the high priest who was presiding over the assembly since Paul knew it was the Sanhedrin.
Instead, I believe Paul was actually being belligerent, essentially saying a true high priest wouldn't act this way. At that point, Paul showed he didn't respect the authority of the high priest or the Sanhedrin and essentially sealed his fate as far as they were concerned.
He tries to get out of it by creating a squabble between the Pharisees and the Sadducees about resurrection (they're so predictable). Then some of the Pharisees even stand up for Paul, but it was too late. He deserved too much hatred up to this point. Again, he has to be rescued by the Roman commander. A group of Jews plotted to kill Paul, but Paul finds out about the plot and eludes the plot by being transferred to Caesarea, which is a port city on the Mediterranean Sea.
When we read the Bible, we should get over the idea that we can always find a direct application in everything we read. Not everything in the Bible was meant to be applied, some of it is just to help paint the picture. We'll oftentimes use people we know the Bible portrays as good or righteous and just emulate everything they do. So in this story for instance, we shouldn't take Paul's disrespect toward the high priest as license to disrespect our leaders even if we think they deserve it. Maybe Paul was OK to do it, but it's not really portrayed as the thing to do in this story.
That being said, throughout Matthew and Acts, there is one thing we see as a pattern. We're looking at the big picture here rather than trying to find meaning in every little detail (though sometimes we can do that). The question that was raised for me after reading this chapter was this: How can we, as believers live out an undying passion for Jesus without becoming unreasonable and closed-minded like the Pharisees with Jesus and the Jews in general with Paul.
On the one hand, we can respect their steadfastness in what they believe. On the other hand, it doesn't take a genius to see there's something wrong with this picture. Should the Jewish leaders have seen the Truth? Should it have been so obvious to them that they should believe in Jesus or what Paul was saying? All throughout history, we see examples of this not just from Jews, but also from Christians.
So we have a dilemma. We want to remain steadfast and true to our faith, but not resort to the kind of antics we see in Acts 22 and 23. You could say, the Jews in Ephesus (earlier in Acts) and in Jerusalem were fundamentalists. There's something appealing about being a fundamentalist. They're committed. They study very hard and know what they're talking about (at least from their particular point of view). They stick with the fundamentals. So what's the problem?
I've heard one pastor describe it like this: The problem with Christian fundamentalists is not that they are fundamental, it's that they aren't fundamental enough about the right things. So in the case of the Jews, we might find some precedent in the Old Testament for them to behave the way they did. After all, the Law was strict and ruthless--and so were the religious leaders.
But as Christians, what we are called to be fundamental about is Jesus. When all else fails (and even when it doesn't) we go straight to Jesus. We are to be fundamental about being like Christ. Now Jesus was no pushover. Other people did not control Him, but His way was not about power and separation, but about self-sacrifice and reconciliation. He was ruthless about self-sacrifice and caring for people--especially sinners and people who were far from Him. You would have never found Him arguing that people should adhere more to the fine, points of the Law. You would find Him teaching about the heart of the matter.
That's what religious fundamentalists don't get--they care more about the law than the people the law was intended to serve. Love is a more demanding law. Love doesn't allow us to get off on technicalities. Grace is messy. Self-sacrifice is hard. But ultimately, if we want to be "fundamental" about true Christianity, these are the things we need to study and take to heart.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 22
The Beginning of the End
As Acts 22 begins, we find Paul standing up before the rioting crowd to explain himself. Perhaps it's predictable that they won't listen, but he decides to give it a shot. For some reason, Paul continues to believe that by giving a speech, people will calm down and be reasonable. He believed this despite the fact that just about every one of his speeches to this point has not ended well.
But for Paul, the opportunity to share the Gospel is much more important than saving his own skin. It reminds me a bit of Jesus' words, "Whoever wants to save his life will lose it. But whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." In the end, we'll find that Paul does ultimately lose his life, but first he needs to make a trip to Rome? How did he get to Rome?
With the crowd in a fevered pitch, the commander steps in again and takes Paul into custody. Surprisingly, the commander seems to be completely unaware of the internal debate among Christians and Jews because he can't figure out why everyone is so angry about what Paul said.
What we see here is the depth of chasm between the two groups--the Jews and the Gentiles. The mob of Jews were very willing to listen to Paul when he appealed to them them about being a Jew himself. But as soon as he told them he was sent to the Gentiles, the uproar resumed. It's difficult for us to understand the hatred that existed by the Jews toward the Gentiles. They were supposed to be God's chosen people, yet they were oppressed by pagans. The Gentiles saw the Jews as primitive and backward in their thinking--not enlightened like them.
The real problem the Jews had with Paul was that it was impossible for them to believe the Gentiles were part of God's salvation plan. Their exclusive attitude permeated all of life.
But the Romans had much the same attitude. The government of the Roman Empire was not consistent, but very pragmatic. When they would incorporate a new territory or people group into the Empire, they wouldn't completely Romanize them. In fact, they would usually let them govern themselves for the most part as long as they kept peace and paid their taxes. At the same time, the cities that were incorporated also didn't have the same status as the cities that were original Roman colonies (founded by the Romans). Cities could gain Roman citizenship by doing certain thing like housing military ranks or Roman temples, etc, and individuals could earn their citizenship (or buy it like the commander in Acts 22).
Paul was a Jew by birth, but also a Roman citizen because he was born in Tarsus, a Roman colony and key city. Roman citizens had more rights than non-citizens within the Empire. One of the rights they had was that they could not be flogged or punished without a fair trial, and they could always appeal to the Emperor. If Paul had only been a Jew, the commander would have just proceeded with his plan and Paul probably would have eventually been killed in Jerusalem. Instead, when the command found out Paul was a Roman citizen, he treated him much differently. In Acts 23, the command learns what all the fuss is about.
As Acts 22 begins, we find Paul standing up before the rioting crowd to explain himself. Perhaps it's predictable that they won't listen, but he decides to give it a shot. For some reason, Paul continues to believe that by giving a speech, people will calm down and be reasonable. He believed this despite the fact that just about every one of his speeches to this point has not ended well.
But for Paul, the opportunity to share the Gospel is much more important than saving his own skin. It reminds me a bit of Jesus' words, "Whoever wants to save his life will lose it. But whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." In the end, we'll find that Paul does ultimately lose his life, but first he needs to make a trip to Rome? How did he get to Rome?
With the crowd in a fevered pitch, the commander steps in again and takes Paul into custody. Surprisingly, the commander seems to be completely unaware of the internal debate among Christians and Jews because he can't figure out why everyone is so angry about what Paul said.
What we see here is the depth of chasm between the two groups--the Jews and the Gentiles. The mob of Jews were very willing to listen to Paul when he appealed to them them about being a Jew himself. But as soon as he told them he was sent to the Gentiles, the uproar resumed. It's difficult for us to understand the hatred that existed by the Jews toward the Gentiles. They were supposed to be God's chosen people, yet they were oppressed by pagans. The Gentiles saw the Jews as primitive and backward in their thinking--not enlightened like them.
The real problem the Jews had with Paul was that it was impossible for them to believe the Gentiles were part of God's salvation plan. Their exclusive attitude permeated all of life.
But the Romans had much the same attitude. The government of the Roman Empire was not consistent, but very pragmatic. When they would incorporate a new territory or people group into the Empire, they wouldn't completely Romanize them. In fact, they would usually let them govern themselves for the most part as long as they kept peace and paid their taxes. At the same time, the cities that were incorporated also didn't have the same status as the cities that were original Roman colonies (founded by the Romans). Cities could gain Roman citizenship by doing certain thing like housing military ranks or Roman temples, etc, and individuals could earn their citizenship (or buy it like the commander in Acts 22).
Paul was a Jew by birth, but also a Roman citizen because he was born in Tarsus, a Roman colony and key city. Roman citizens had more rights than non-citizens within the Empire. One of the rights they had was that they could not be flogged or punished without a fair trial, and they could always appeal to the Emperor. If Paul had only been a Jew, the commander would have just proceeded with his plan and Paul probably would have eventually been killed in Jerusalem. Instead, when the command found out Paul was a Roman citizen, he treated him much differently. In Acts 23, the command learns what all the fuss is about.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 21
Why would he do that?
In Acts 21, we find Paul leaving for Jerusalem. We know from Paul's letters that it was his desire to bring the Gospel to Spain--which, if you know your geography is in the opposite direction of Jerusalem. So why was Paul so determined to go to Jerusalem?
All along the way, there were people warning him that bad things were going to happen in Jerusalem, but he pressed on despite their warnings. I don't think you'll pick this up from the book of Acts, but as Paul traveled to all the churches, he was collecting money for the church in Jerusalem. While he was traveling, Palestine was experiencing a famine that was greatly affecting the church in Jerusalem which was made up primarily of poor people.
The church in Jerusalem were primarily Jews since Jerusalem was made up primarily of Jews, so when the Gentile churches of Asia and Macedonia showed their faith, the mother church in Jerusalem would be more likely to accept them as brothers--or so Paul thought.
Throughout history to that point, the pagan religions saw no correlation between religion and ethics. After all, the gods didn't even behave in an ethical way, so why would they expect humans to behave that way? All that was required of pagans was to make the regular sacrifices to appease the gods. Judaism was different, however. The Old Testament requires all Jews to "be holy as I am Holy." Judaism was really the first religion that had ethical requirements as a result of belief in God. That's why the Law was so important to them. It's what distinguished them from the pagans (Gentiles).
Word got back to the church in Jerusalem the Paul was telling the Gentiles that they didn't have to follow the Law in order to be followers of Christ. But it seems as though the church in Jerusalem was much more conservative in this area than Paul was. They thought he was watering things down in order to gain followers. This was to be expected since they were in the "hot bed" of Judaism. So the church reacted to Paul the way a conservative church would react to an ultra-liberal pastor today. The other Jews joined in despite the fact the Paul tried to prove he wasn't anti-law by observing a Jewish purification rite. They would do anything to stop the spread of heresy and the watering-down of faith.
It would have ended right there for Paul if it hadn't been for the Roman military coming in an rescuing him, taking him into custody. At the end of the chapter, Paul thinks he can talk his way out of it and convince them of the truth of his message, but again, he was wrong.
In Acts 21, we find Paul leaving for Jerusalem. We know from Paul's letters that it was his desire to bring the Gospel to Spain--which, if you know your geography is in the opposite direction of Jerusalem. So why was Paul so determined to go to Jerusalem?
All along the way, there were people warning him that bad things were going to happen in Jerusalem, but he pressed on despite their warnings. I don't think you'll pick this up from the book of Acts, but as Paul traveled to all the churches, he was collecting money for the church in Jerusalem. While he was traveling, Palestine was experiencing a famine that was greatly affecting the church in Jerusalem which was made up primarily of poor people.
The church in Jerusalem were primarily Jews since Jerusalem was made up primarily of Jews, so when the Gentile churches of Asia and Macedonia showed their faith, the mother church in Jerusalem would be more likely to accept them as brothers--or so Paul thought.
Throughout history to that point, the pagan religions saw no correlation between religion and ethics. After all, the gods didn't even behave in an ethical way, so why would they expect humans to behave that way? All that was required of pagans was to make the regular sacrifices to appease the gods. Judaism was different, however. The Old Testament requires all Jews to "be holy as I am Holy." Judaism was really the first religion that had ethical requirements as a result of belief in God. That's why the Law was so important to them. It's what distinguished them from the pagans (Gentiles).
Word got back to the church in Jerusalem the Paul was telling the Gentiles that they didn't have to follow the Law in order to be followers of Christ. But it seems as though the church in Jerusalem was much more conservative in this area than Paul was. They thought he was watering things down in order to gain followers. This was to be expected since they were in the "hot bed" of Judaism. So the church reacted to Paul the way a conservative church would react to an ultra-liberal pastor today. The other Jews joined in despite the fact the Paul tried to prove he wasn't anti-law by observing a Jewish purification rite. They would do anything to stop the spread of heresy and the watering-down of faith.
It would have ended right there for Paul if it hadn't been for the Roman military coming in an rescuing him, taking him into custody. At the end of the chapter, Paul thinks he can talk his way out of it and convince them of the truth of his message, but again, he was wrong.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 20
The Car Photo
Within three weeks of getting married, Ann and I moved 16 hours away from home to attend seminary in Kentucky. Occasionally, we would make it back home to visit for a few days and it was always hard to go back. She doesn't do it much anymore, but it used to be that any time we would leave, Ann's mom would take a picture of us just before we got in the car to leave. You could probably make a little pictorial history of my kid's first 5 or 6 years just from the photos taken by the car. We've come and gone so many times now, she doesn't really take those photos anymore.
What we have in Acts 20 is Paul's "car photo" in Ephesus. When we think of the Apostle Paul, we often think of a strong, independent, sometimes brash man who moved from place to place to spread the Gospel. People who move a lot tend to stop forming very deep relationships, especially if they know they'll be moving in a year or two anyway. But it seems like this is not how Paul was--at least not in Ephesus.
All in all, Paul spent about 3 years in Ephesus and had such an effective ministry that it affected the local economy (remember the local idol-maker union protested and ran him out of town). Over those three years, Paul apparently saw what he did as more than just his job. He left Ephesus and went on to Macedonia and Greece, but on his way back to Jerusalem, he had to see his brothers in Ephesus one more time and what we see is probably one of the more touching moments in the book of Acts.
Paul actually doesn't go back to Ephesus, but instead stays a number of miles away because he knows he can't show his face in Ephesus again. While he is at Miletus, Paul sends for the church leaders to come say goodbye. When they arrive, Paul encourages them to keep building the church after he is gone. He is honest with them. He knows that there are tough times ahead for them. Ephesus probably won't calm down much just because Paul is gone--afterall, the church is still a strong force in the city. People, both Jews and Greeks will work to tear the church down so the leaders need to be committed and not let down their guard.
In addition, Paul reminds them that as he was there, everything he did was beyond reproach. That matters. The people who would come in and lead the church astray might accuse Paul of preaching for his own gain. So he reminded them that he didn't take money from them and even endured some pretty tough stuff to build them us. The proof of the Gospel is the way Paul conducted himself when he was in Ephesus.
In the end, he knows he'll never see these leaders again, so he takes the opportunity to pray with them. I can see them huddled in a big circle with arms around each other, praying together, crying, and hugging. In the three years Paul was there and through the riots and death threats, he formed a brotherhood that would last forever.
Sometimes churches can get this close, but oftentimes they don't. What causes churches, groups of friends, or small groups to develop this kind of bond? Adversity. Paul and the Ephesians went through the war together and it forged their friendship in stone. They worked together for a common purpose and accomplished it together.
The reason churches often fail to reach this level of depth in their relationships is because the never really put themselves through anything. They're often, too willing to be comfortable and just focus on building the relationships rather than on building the Kingdom. When churches and small groups focus on building the Kingdom together, their relationships will deepen with each challenge and hardship. The church wasn't intended just to sit around and swap recipes. We have a job to do and doing it together will develop the deep relationships we so desire.
Even though Paul escapes Ephesus, we'll soon find out that his troubles were only just beginning.
Within three weeks of getting married, Ann and I moved 16 hours away from home to attend seminary in Kentucky. Occasionally, we would make it back home to visit for a few days and it was always hard to go back. She doesn't do it much anymore, but it used to be that any time we would leave, Ann's mom would take a picture of us just before we got in the car to leave. You could probably make a little pictorial history of my kid's first 5 or 6 years just from the photos taken by the car. We've come and gone so many times now, she doesn't really take those photos anymore.
What we have in Acts 20 is Paul's "car photo" in Ephesus. When we think of the Apostle Paul, we often think of a strong, independent, sometimes brash man who moved from place to place to spread the Gospel. People who move a lot tend to stop forming very deep relationships, especially if they know they'll be moving in a year or two anyway. But it seems like this is not how Paul was--at least not in Ephesus.
All in all, Paul spent about 3 years in Ephesus and had such an effective ministry that it affected the local economy (remember the local idol-maker union protested and ran him out of town). Over those three years, Paul apparently saw what he did as more than just his job. He left Ephesus and went on to Macedonia and Greece, but on his way back to Jerusalem, he had to see his brothers in Ephesus one more time and what we see is probably one of the more touching moments in the book of Acts.
Paul actually doesn't go back to Ephesus, but instead stays a number of miles away because he knows he can't show his face in Ephesus again. While he is at Miletus, Paul sends for the church leaders to come say goodbye. When they arrive, Paul encourages them to keep building the church after he is gone. He is honest with them. He knows that there are tough times ahead for them. Ephesus probably won't calm down much just because Paul is gone--afterall, the church is still a strong force in the city. People, both Jews and Greeks will work to tear the church down so the leaders need to be committed and not let down their guard.
In addition, Paul reminds them that as he was there, everything he did was beyond reproach. That matters. The people who would come in and lead the church astray might accuse Paul of preaching for his own gain. So he reminded them that he didn't take money from them and even endured some pretty tough stuff to build them us. The proof of the Gospel is the way Paul conducted himself when he was in Ephesus.
In the end, he knows he'll never see these leaders again, so he takes the opportunity to pray with them. I can see them huddled in a big circle with arms around each other, praying together, crying, and hugging. In the three years Paul was there and through the riots and death threats, he formed a brotherhood that would last forever.
Sometimes churches can get this close, but oftentimes they don't. What causes churches, groups of friends, or small groups to develop this kind of bond? Adversity. Paul and the Ephesians went through the war together and it forged their friendship in stone. They worked together for a common purpose and accomplished it together.
The reason churches often fail to reach this level of depth in their relationships is because the never really put themselves through anything. They're often, too willing to be comfortable and just focus on building the relationships rather than on building the Kingdom. When churches and small groups focus on building the Kingdom together, their relationships will deepen with each challenge and hardship. The church wasn't intended just to sit around and swap recipes. We have a job to do and doing it together will develop the deep relationships we so desire.
Even though Paul escapes Ephesus, we'll soon find out that his troubles were only just beginning.
Monday, March 8, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 19
The Climax
We're coming to the climax of the book of Acts. Ephesus is where Paul does perhaps his best ministry, but also where the violence against him becomes the greatest. There are a couple of sections here in chapter 19. The first is when Paul first gets to Ephesus. It says Paul found some "disciples" there. This is where it's a little confusing. These disciples apparently didn't know about (or knew very little about Jesus). Paul asks them if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed and then asks them what baptism they received.
In Matthew 3 we read about John the Baptist. John the Baptist was a Jew who was sent to prepare the way for Jesus as Messiah. At that time, when John would baptize people, it would be that they would repent of their sins and ready themselves for the coming of the Messiah. At that point, even John didn't necessarily know the Messiah was Jesus. At a certain point, when he did, but mostly he knew the time was close and the Kingdom was at hand. Later, Jesus would come and fulfill what John prepared the way for.
The disciples in Ephesus believed John and received John's baptism, so they were open to the idea of Jesus being the one they were waiting for. They just needed to be told. They were ready. When Paul came, he finished the job, so to speak.
What's significant here is that Paul associated belief in Jesus with receiving the Holy Spirit. Those believers didn't have the Holy Spirit in them until they received Jesus. That's why the Seven Sons of Sceva were pummeled by the evil spirits when they tried to invoke the name of Jesus. Though they knew Jesus, they didn't really "receive" Him, they only used Him.
I think many people today who call themselves Christians do the same thing--they don't really receive Jesus or invite Him to have His way in their life, they only use Him for whatever it is they need. When we receive Jesus, we receive our identity in Him--our identity as brothers and sisters.
It seems as though Jesus wasn't good for business in Ephesus either. Ephesus was a capital city in the Romans Empire because it houses the great Temple of Artemis (one of the seven ancient wonders of the world). Artemis was one of the most popular gods of the Roman pantheon and therefore the city of Ephesus had special status for housing her temple.
Demetrius made idols to Artemis. As more people believed in Jesus, the need for his idols diminished. Demetrius didn't particularly care if people worshiped Jesus. If they wanted to make him another one of the gods that was fine. It's just that when people began worshiping Jesus, they stopped worshiping Artemis and no longer wanted the idols.
The Roman Empire didn't micromanage its cities. They really didn't care how they operated as long as they paid their taxes and remained reasonably peaceful. The real danger for Ephesus was that if it became too unruly, it would lose its special status and the temple of Artemis would be moved elsewhere, devastating the economy. So you see how important this issue is to the people of Ephesus and why they would make such a fuss over Paul.
That's what the city clerk was worried about when they brought their complaints to him. He was more worried about the rioting than he was about the whole city turning to Jesus. If the Emperor got word of the problems in Ephesus and he had to sent troops there, he wouldn't be happy.
Though Paul spent some time in Ephesus, after this event, he wouldn't return. This event even affects the routs he takes back to Jerusalem when he goes. It was a truly influential event.
As we read the book of Ephesians, we will be able to see that the church in Ephesus was a healthy church. They endured a lot of hardship, but in the end they stayed true to Jesus. Even though Paul doesn't go back to Ephesus, this is not last we'll hear of the city in the book of Acts.
We're coming to the climax of the book of Acts. Ephesus is where Paul does perhaps his best ministry, but also where the violence against him becomes the greatest. There are a couple of sections here in chapter 19. The first is when Paul first gets to Ephesus. It says Paul found some "disciples" there. This is where it's a little confusing. These disciples apparently didn't know about (or knew very little about Jesus). Paul asks them if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed and then asks them what baptism they received.
In Matthew 3 we read about John the Baptist. John the Baptist was a Jew who was sent to prepare the way for Jesus as Messiah. At that time, when John would baptize people, it would be that they would repent of their sins and ready themselves for the coming of the Messiah. At that point, even John didn't necessarily know the Messiah was Jesus. At a certain point, when he did, but mostly he knew the time was close and the Kingdom was at hand. Later, Jesus would come and fulfill what John prepared the way for.
The disciples in Ephesus believed John and received John's baptism, so they were open to the idea of Jesus being the one they were waiting for. They just needed to be told. They were ready. When Paul came, he finished the job, so to speak.
What's significant here is that Paul associated belief in Jesus with receiving the Holy Spirit. Those believers didn't have the Holy Spirit in them until they received Jesus. That's why the Seven Sons of Sceva were pummeled by the evil spirits when they tried to invoke the name of Jesus. Though they knew Jesus, they didn't really "receive" Him, they only used Him.
I think many people today who call themselves Christians do the same thing--they don't really receive Jesus or invite Him to have His way in their life, they only use Him for whatever it is they need. When we receive Jesus, we receive our identity in Him--our identity as brothers and sisters.
It seems as though Jesus wasn't good for business in Ephesus either. Ephesus was a capital city in the Romans Empire because it houses the great Temple of Artemis (one of the seven ancient wonders of the world). Artemis was one of the most popular gods of the Roman pantheon and therefore the city of Ephesus had special status for housing her temple.
Demetrius made idols to Artemis. As more people believed in Jesus, the need for his idols diminished. Demetrius didn't particularly care if people worshiped Jesus. If they wanted to make him another one of the gods that was fine. It's just that when people began worshiping Jesus, they stopped worshiping Artemis and no longer wanted the idols.
The Roman Empire didn't micromanage its cities. They really didn't care how they operated as long as they paid their taxes and remained reasonably peaceful. The real danger for Ephesus was that if it became too unruly, it would lose its special status and the temple of Artemis would be moved elsewhere, devastating the economy. So you see how important this issue is to the people of Ephesus and why they would make such a fuss over Paul.
That's what the city clerk was worried about when they brought their complaints to him. He was more worried about the rioting than he was about the whole city turning to Jesus. If the Emperor got word of the problems in Ephesus and he had to sent troops there, he wouldn't be happy.
Though Paul spent some time in Ephesus, after this event, he wouldn't return. This event even affects the routs he takes back to Jerusalem when he goes. It was a truly influential event.
As we read the book of Ephesians, we will be able to see that the church in Ephesus was a healthy church. They endured a lot of hardship, but in the end they stayed true to Jesus. Even though Paul doesn't go back to Ephesus, this is not last we'll hear of the city in the book of Acts.
Friday, March 5, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 18
A Little History and an Intersection
In Acts 18, I just want to give you a little background information that will be helpful now, but even more helpful down the road. We learned very early on that the Jews were always a thorn in the side of the Romans. The Romans were all about being inclusive. They really didn't care who people worshiped as long as they worshiped their gods as well. The Jews refused--sometimes violently.
The Jews didn't change when Jesus came around. Either they believed in Jesus or they didn't. If they didn't they believe, they would often incite unrest, which was a grave sin to the Romans. I was because of this that in verse 2, Luke mentions that the Jews were ordered to leave Rome. Although some Jews did believe--like apparently Aquila and Priscila--many did not and it created unrest in the capital city of Rome. Of course, if the Romans couldn't keep peace in Rome, where could they keep peace, so they expelled the Jews--even the Jewish Christians.
Now that left the Gentile Christians in Rome. Since the Gentiles didn't have all the background the Jewish Christians did (the Law, etc.) they were left to figure it out for themselves. Later, when the Jews were allowed to come back to Rome, the Jewish Christians found the church much different that when they left. Thus, in the book of Romans Paul deals with the rift that has grown between the Gentile Christians and the Jewish Christians.
In Acts 18, Paul once again goes to the synagogue first, then when they reject his message (except for their leader!) he goes right next door and starts preaching to the Gentiles. The Jews complain to the proconsul, Gallio, but he sees it as an internal squabble and doesn't want to have anything to do with their case. They apparently didn't incite a big enough riot in Corinth to get his attention. Don't worry, that won't be the case in Ephesus.
At the end of the chapter, we are introduced to Apollos. We don't hear a lot more about Apollos in Acts, but we will hear of him again in 1 Corinthians. Apollos was a Jew who followed Jesus, although he had very little information about Him. But his lack of knowledge didn't stop him from preaching anyway. He taught about what he knew. Aquilla and Priscilla were there to fill him in on the details, but he didn't wait until he knew everything to spread the word.
Oftentimes, we think that we can't be effective for Jesus because we don't know everything. We're not confident in our Bible knowledge, or we still have some hangups or sins we're still dealing with. Once we get through those, we say, then we'll be more active in sharing Jesus. But as you can see Apollos one taught what he knew. He didn't wait until he was fully educated. In the same way, you can also make an impact for Jesus, even if you don't know the Bible very well. I hope you're making an effort in that area, but don't wait because if that's your attitude, you will never know enough about God to be able to share. Instead, just talk about what Jesus has done for you. If there's a question you can't answer, go ask someone who might know and find the answer. But don't wait just because you're still growing. All of us are.
In Acts 18, I just want to give you a little background information that will be helpful now, but even more helpful down the road. We learned very early on that the Jews were always a thorn in the side of the Romans. The Romans were all about being inclusive. They really didn't care who people worshiped as long as they worshiped their gods as well. The Jews refused--sometimes violently.
The Jews didn't change when Jesus came around. Either they believed in Jesus or they didn't. If they didn't they believe, they would often incite unrest, which was a grave sin to the Romans. I was because of this that in verse 2, Luke mentions that the Jews were ordered to leave Rome. Although some Jews did believe--like apparently Aquila and Priscila--many did not and it created unrest in the capital city of Rome. Of course, if the Romans couldn't keep peace in Rome, where could they keep peace, so they expelled the Jews--even the Jewish Christians.
Now that left the Gentile Christians in Rome. Since the Gentiles didn't have all the background the Jewish Christians did (the Law, etc.) they were left to figure it out for themselves. Later, when the Jews were allowed to come back to Rome, the Jewish Christians found the church much different that when they left. Thus, in the book of Romans Paul deals with the rift that has grown between the Gentile Christians and the Jewish Christians.
In Acts 18, Paul once again goes to the synagogue first, then when they reject his message (except for their leader!) he goes right next door and starts preaching to the Gentiles. The Jews complain to the proconsul, Gallio, but he sees it as an internal squabble and doesn't want to have anything to do with their case. They apparently didn't incite a big enough riot in Corinth to get his attention. Don't worry, that won't be the case in Ephesus.
At the end of the chapter, we are introduced to Apollos. We don't hear a lot more about Apollos in Acts, but we will hear of him again in 1 Corinthians. Apollos was a Jew who followed Jesus, although he had very little information about Him. But his lack of knowledge didn't stop him from preaching anyway. He taught about what he knew. Aquilla and Priscilla were there to fill him in on the details, but he didn't wait until he knew everything to spread the word.
Oftentimes, we think that we can't be effective for Jesus because we don't know everything. We're not confident in our Bible knowledge, or we still have some hangups or sins we're still dealing with. Once we get through those, we say, then we'll be more active in sharing Jesus. But as you can see Apollos one taught what he knew. He didn't wait until he was fully educated. In the same way, you can also make an impact for Jesus, even if you don't know the Bible very well. I hope you're making an effort in that area, but don't wait because if that's your attitude, you will never know enough about God to be able to share. Instead, just talk about what Jesus has done for you. If there's a question you can't answer, go ask someone who might know and find the answer. But don't wait just because you're still growing. All of us are.
NT Journey--Acts 17
Looking for Signs of God
The Apostle Paul is often used as an example for us to follow. He was sold out and focused on taking the message of Jesus to anyone who would listen (and even some who wouldn't), so we see that as our duty as well. He wrote, "I have become all things to all people so that I might...save some," so we do the same.
In Acts 17, Paul does something that I think we should also readily imitate. When Paul went to Athens, it says he was distressed to see the city so full of idols. I'm not sure why he was so surprised, given the state of religion in the Roman Empire in those days. Maybe it's just that there were so many, it was shocking to him. Sometimes we can know something in our head, but then when we experience it, we are still blown away. For instance, I know Mt. Rushmore is impressive, but every time I've gone to see it, I've been blown away!
In any case--and here's what I think we can take from this story--Paul, obviously didn't like the idols, but he did see something good there. What he saw was that people were desperate for God. Of course, they didn't know how to properly express it or where to find the satisfaction of life with God, but at least they were searching for what they knew was out there.
We learn this is Paul's attitude in verse 22, where he says, "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: "To an Unknown God." Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you."
What Paul did here was, rather than condemn them for their idol worship, he actually praised them for their search for God. However, it was never his intent just to leave them in darkness. Instead, he used the opportunity to tell them about Jesus. What was unknown to them before, is now known--it's his God, the maker of everything. He did take the time to try to set them straight on idols, but first he worked to find common ground before he spoke to them about Jesus.
Our application here is certainly that we should seek to find common ground with people. Too often Christians will start with condemnation, thinking it's their job to convict people of their sin. But that's the job of the Holy Spirit. Our first task with people who don't know Jesus is to find that common ground. We can then tell them about Jesus and one of two things can happen.
First, God might just convict them of their sin without our help. Believe it or not, God is already working in people's lives before we meet them. When we meet them, we only join Him in what He's already doing. So look for what God's doing and join Him.
Second, only after we've formed a relationship with a person will they be ready to hear what we have to say about their lifestyle or choices they're making. Unless we're willing to associate with them and accept them as they are, they won't care if we think they need to make some changes. But caring for them as they are (even if they don't change or come to Jesus) is the doorway to speak into their life.
Paul saw that despite the idols, God was already speaking to the Athenians and he just sought to join Him in that work. That's our task as well.
The Apostle Paul is often used as an example for us to follow. He was sold out and focused on taking the message of Jesus to anyone who would listen (and even some who wouldn't), so we see that as our duty as well. He wrote, "I have become all things to all people so that I might...save some," so we do the same.
In Acts 17, Paul does something that I think we should also readily imitate. When Paul went to Athens, it says he was distressed to see the city so full of idols. I'm not sure why he was so surprised, given the state of religion in the Roman Empire in those days. Maybe it's just that there were so many, it was shocking to him. Sometimes we can know something in our head, but then when we experience it, we are still blown away. For instance, I know Mt. Rushmore is impressive, but every time I've gone to see it, I've been blown away!
In any case--and here's what I think we can take from this story--Paul, obviously didn't like the idols, but he did see something good there. What he saw was that people were desperate for God. Of course, they didn't know how to properly express it or where to find the satisfaction of life with God, but at least they were searching for what they knew was out there.
We learn this is Paul's attitude in verse 22, where he says, "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: "To an Unknown God." Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you."
What Paul did here was, rather than condemn them for their idol worship, he actually praised them for their search for God. However, it was never his intent just to leave them in darkness. Instead, he used the opportunity to tell them about Jesus. What was unknown to them before, is now known--it's his God, the maker of everything. He did take the time to try to set them straight on idols, but first he worked to find common ground before he spoke to them about Jesus.
Our application here is certainly that we should seek to find common ground with people. Too often Christians will start with condemnation, thinking it's their job to convict people of their sin. But that's the job of the Holy Spirit. Our first task with people who don't know Jesus is to find that common ground. We can then tell them about Jesus and one of two things can happen.
First, God might just convict them of their sin without our help. Believe it or not, God is already working in people's lives before we meet them. When we meet them, we only join Him in what He's already doing. So look for what God's doing and join Him.
Second, only after we've formed a relationship with a person will they be ready to hear what we have to say about their lifestyle or choices they're making. Unless we're willing to associate with them and accept them as they are, they won't care if we think they need to make some changes. But caring for them as they are (even if they don't change or come to Jesus) is the doorway to speak into their life.
Paul saw that despite the idols, God was already speaking to the Athenians and he just sought to join Him in that work. That's our task as well.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 16
Open Doors
There are a lot of things happening in Acts 16. Because of a dispute, Paul changes partners from Barnabas to Silas and also picks up Timothy. He's forbidden by God from preaching in certain places and moves on. Luke apparently joins Paul in his travels--in verse 10 notice the change from "they" language to "we" language. He makes a convert out of Lydia and a woman who was possessed by a demon.
The story of the woman who was possessed is an interesting one because she was being used by some men in the city is a sort of side-show. The would charge people money to have her, by way of the "python spirit" tell them the future. When Paul casts out the demon, they lose their cash-cow and it makes them angry. Even though they most likely didn't care what Paul and Silas were preaching, they accused them of making them do things that were illegal and Paul and Silas are put in prison.
While they're in prison, Paul and Silas start singing. While they are singing, there's an earthquake. While we often think that it's God that caused the earthquake, the text doesn't actually say that. It's certainly possible God caused the earthquake (or maybe Paul and Silas were just really bad singers) and the text seems to imply that's the case.
At this point you would think Paul and Silas would interpret the open jail doors as a sign that God wanted them to escape. Instead, they use it as an opportunity to preach the Gospel. In the Roman world, the jailer was responsible for the prisoners. If prisoners escaped under his watch, he would be executed. So when the jail saw the doors open, he was about to just do the job himself when Paul and Silas stopped him. Of course he was terrified. But they assured him that all the prisoners were there. They were able to share Christ with him and he believed.
I think maybe the lesson here for us might be that just because a "door is open," it doesn't mean we have to go through it. When we're trying to ascertain God's will, in many circumstances we just look for open doors and praise God that His will was clear. But I'm not so sure open doors are always a sign of God's will. First, Paul and Silas had the ultimate open door, but they refused to go through it. Instead of worrying about their own safety, they were more concerned about what would happen to the jailer. A greater good was done precisely because Paul and Silas didn't go through the open door.
The other problem with interpreting open doors as God's will is that clearly one of the great character traits in the Bible is perseverance. If perseverance is so important, how do we know when a closed door is God saying "no" and when we should persevere? I think sometimes things work out, just because they work out. Sometimes God may open a door for us, but we still need to use wisdom and look at things from a Kingdom perspective as we make any decision.
There are a lot of things happening in Acts 16. Because of a dispute, Paul changes partners from Barnabas to Silas and also picks up Timothy. He's forbidden by God from preaching in certain places and moves on. Luke apparently joins Paul in his travels--in verse 10 notice the change from "they" language to "we" language. He makes a convert out of Lydia and a woman who was possessed by a demon.
The story of the woman who was possessed is an interesting one because she was being used by some men in the city is a sort of side-show. The would charge people money to have her, by way of the "python spirit" tell them the future. When Paul casts out the demon, they lose their cash-cow and it makes them angry. Even though they most likely didn't care what Paul and Silas were preaching, they accused them of making them do things that were illegal and Paul and Silas are put in prison.
While they're in prison, Paul and Silas start singing. While they are singing, there's an earthquake. While we often think that it's God that caused the earthquake, the text doesn't actually say that. It's certainly possible God caused the earthquake (or maybe Paul and Silas were just really bad singers) and the text seems to imply that's the case.
At this point you would think Paul and Silas would interpret the open jail doors as a sign that God wanted them to escape. Instead, they use it as an opportunity to preach the Gospel. In the Roman world, the jailer was responsible for the prisoners. If prisoners escaped under his watch, he would be executed. So when the jail saw the doors open, he was about to just do the job himself when Paul and Silas stopped him. Of course he was terrified. But they assured him that all the prisoners were there. They were able to share Christ with him and he believed.
I think maybe the lesson here for us might be that just because a "door is open," it doesn't mean we have to go through it. When we're trying to ascertain God's will, in many circumstances we just look for open doors and praise God that His will was clear. But I'm not so sure open doors are always a sign of God's will. First, Paul and Silas had the ultimate open door, but they refused to go through it. Instead of worrying about their own safety, they were more concerned about what would happen to the jailer. A greater good was done precisely because Paul and Silas didn't go through the open door.
The other problem with interpreting open doors as God's will is that clearly one of the great character traits in the Bible is perseverance. If perseverance is so important, how do we know when a closed door is God saying "no" and when we should persevere? I think sometimes things work out, just because they work out. Sometimes God may open a door for us, but we still need to use wisdom and look at things from a Kingdom perspective as we make any decision.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 15
When Books Intersect
I know we haven't come to the book of Galatians yet, but it is the next book we're going to read. What we call the "council of Jerusalem" is recorded in Acts 15 and is also referenced by Paul in the book of Galatians. In fact, the situation we find in Acts 15 is that Paul is preaching and setting up churches in the province of Galatia. His message is that people don't have to be Jews in order to be Christians. In other words, they don't have to obey the ceremonial laws, men don't have to be circumcised, etc. But as Paul is preaching--and as we saw in Iconium and Lystra, some Jews are going around after Paul and undoing everything he had done.
In Galatians, Paul is very angry with the people in the churches for quickly abandoning what he taught them. Another thing these Jewish Christians were doing was to question his authority. So Paul spends a good amount of time in Galatians defending himself as an Apostle.
In any case, after he and Barnabas got back to Antioch, the controversy flared up again so the church sent Paul and Barnabas to see the Apostles in Jerusalem. What they determined was that they would keep the requirements (at least as far as the Law is concerned) to a bare minimum.
Luke, in Acts 15 says the people were "glad for its encouraging message." That's the thing about the Gospel. It's good news. There aren't all kinds of laws and regulations to remember to follow in order to be a follower of Christ. People can rest easy knowing we are not saved based on our perfection following the Law, but only through faith in Christ. Now that doesn't mean that following Jesus can't be difficult--it often is. But following Jesus is not "weighty." It's not going to feel like a burden. That's the message Paul was trying to convey that was being undone by the "Judaizers." As I said earlier, Paul addresses this very issue in the book of Galatians.
Acts 15 is also where Paul and Barnabas part ways. If you remember earlier in Acts, John Mark deserted Paul and Barnabas part way through their missionary journey. Paul still had some sour grapes about that so when Barnabas suggested he come along, Paul objected very strongly. I guess what this shows is that even the early church and the Apostles were not perfect.
I know we haven't come to the book of Galatians yet, but it is the next book we're going to read. What we call the "council of Jerusalem" is recorded in Acts 15 and is also referenced by Paul in the book of Galatians. In fact, the situation we find in Acts 15 is that Paul is preaching and setting up churches in the province of Galatia. His message is that people don't have to be Jews in order to be Christians. In other words, they don't have to obey the ceremonial laws, men don't have to be circumcised, etc. But as Paul is preaching--and as we saw in Iconium and Lystra, some Jews are going around after Paul and undoing everything he had done.
In Galatians, Paul is very angry with the people in the churches for quickly abandoning what he taught them. Another thing these Jewish Christians were doing was to question his authority. So Paul spends a good amount of time in Galatians defending himself as an Apostle.
In any case, after he and Barnabas got back to Antioch, the controversy flared up again so the church sent Paul and Barnabas to see the Apostles in Jerusalem. What they determined was that they would keep the requirements (at least as far as the Law is concerned) to a bare minimum.
Luke, in Acts 15 says the people were "glad for its encouraging message." That's the thing about the Gospel. It's good news. There aren't all kinds of laws and regulations to remember to follow in order to be a follower of Christ. People can rest easy knowing we are not saved based on our perfection following the Law, but only through faith in Christ. Now that doesn't mean that following Jesus can't be difficult--it often is. But following Jesus is not "weighty." It's not going to feel like a burden. That's the message Paul was trying to convey that was being undone by the "Judaizers." As I said earlier, Paul addresses this very issue in the book of Galatians.
Acts 15 is also where Paul and Barnabas part ways. If you remember earlier in Acts, John Mark deserted Paul and Barnabas part way through their missionary journey. Paul still had some sour grapes about that so when Barnabas suggested he come along, Paul objected very strongly. I guess what this shows is that even the early church and the Apostles were not perfect.
Monday, March 1, 2010
NT Journey--Acts 14
Confirming What I Already Believe
OK, time for a little application here. In Acts 14, we see Paul and Barnabas continue their missionary journey. First, they headed to Iconium. One thing you should know about the three churches mentioned in this chapter is that they are all located in the Roman Province of Galatia (if you haven't gotten out your Bible atlas yet, look it up online). What's significant about that is that the letter Paul wrote to the Galatians would have been written to the churches in these cities, among others.
Notice that the people in these cities seemed to be corrupted pretty easily. Even though Paul and Barnabas spoke convincingly, it didn't seem to take long before the people turned on them. What we'll see in the book of Galatians is that Paul is steaming mad when he writes it. He taught them one thing and again, someone else has come in and changed their minds. This was certainly true for Iconium and Lystra--to the point where Paul was even stoned and left for dead.
But I think what happens in Lystra is the most interesting and telling part of the chapter. In Lystra, Paul heals a crippled man. The people are so amazed, they think he and Barnabas are gods. Never mind the fact that they preached very clearly that they were not gods, they were only human. But the Roman, who were so tied to their own religion interpreted what they saw through the lens of their religion. No matter what Paul and Barnabas said, the people were determined to believe they were gods.
We've seen this earlier in the book of Acts as well as in Matthew. When people make up their mind, they often don't like to be open to new interpretations. Now there certainly is some value in "sticking to your guns," but I do think we always have to be open to new interpretations. That doesn't mean we should just accept every interpretation as equally legitimate, but we do need to be open to the fact that we could be wrong and that requires a great deal of humility.
I hope that's the case as you're reading through the New Testament. If you grew up in the church and have been listening to preaching all your life, my guess is that you've formed a certain worldview or interpretation of scripture that you hold tightly to. But if you really want to engage with Scripture, read it with new eyes each time. As yourself, "What is the author really trying to say?" or "How would the people have understood what Jesus said here?" Be careful not to bring your pre-existing ideas into the equation too soon. There is a place to go back to the memory bank, but first take the passage on its own value, then go back. Compare the passage with other passages you know and keep your mind open to learning more.
We do this all the time with Jesus. If we grew up in a fundamentalist church, we see Jesus as a taskmaster who held everyone to a high standard of rules and condemned sinners. (not true) If we grew up in a liberal church, we find a Jesus wishy-washy Jesus who didn't rock the boat too much. (also not true) If we grew up outside the church, we make Jesus out to be whatever we want Him to be (if we pay any attention to Him at all). But when we come to scripture, read with new eyes and see how your view of Jesus is shaped each time you go back to that passage.
Learning and growing requires re-evaluation. When we refuse to change, we refuse to grow (and sometimes the messenger gets left for dead).
OK, time for a little application here. In Acts 14, we see Paul and Barnabas continue their missionary journey. First, they headed to Iconium. One thing you should know about the three churches mentioned in this chapter is that they are all located in the Roman Province of Galatia (if you haven't gotten out your Bible atlas yet, look it up online). What's significant about that is that the letter Paul wrote to the Galatians would have been written to the churches in these cities, among others.
Notice that the people in these cities seemed to be corrupted pretty easily. Even though Paul and Barnabas spoke convincingly, it didn't seem to take long before the people turned on them. What we'll see in the book of Galatians is that Paul is steaming mad when he writes it. He taught them one thing and again, someone else has come in and changed their minds. This was certainly true for Iconium and Lystra--to the point where Paul was even stoned and left for dead.
But I think what happens in Lystra is the most interesting and telling part of the chapter. In Lystra, Paul heals a crippled man. The people are so amazed, they think he and Barnabas are gods. Never mind the fact that they preached very clearly that they were not gods, they were only human. But the Roman, who were so tied to their own religion interpreted what they saw through the lens of their religion. No matter what Paul and Barnabas said, the people were determined to believe they were gods.
We've seen this earlier in the book of Acts as well as in Matthew. When people make up their mind, they often don't like to be open to new interpretations. Now there certainly is some value in "sticking to your guns," but I do think we always have to be open to new interpretations. That doesn't mean we should just accept every interpretation as equally legitimate, but we do need to be open to the fact that we could be wrong and that requires a great deal of humility.
I hope that's the case as you're reading through the New Testament. If you grew up in the church and have been listening to preaching all your life, my guess is that you've formed a certain worldview or interpretation of scripture that you hold tightly to. But if you really want to engage with Scripture, read it with new eyes each time. As yourself, "What is the author really trying to say?" or "How would the people have understood what Jesus said here?" Be careful not to bring your pre-existing ideas into the equation too soon. There is a place to go back to the memory bank, but first take the passage on its own value, then go back. Compare the passage with other passages you know and keep your mind open to learning more.
We do this all the time with Jesus. If we grew up in a fundamentalist church, we see Jesus as a taskmaster who held everyone to a high standard of rules and condemned sinners. (not true) If we grew up in a liberal church, we find a Jesus wishy-washy Jesus who didn't rock the boat too much. (also not true) If we grew up outside the church, we make Jesus out to be whatever we want Him to be (if we pay any attention to Him at all). But when we come to scripture, read with new eyes and see how your view of Jesus is shaped each time you go back to that passage.
Learning and growing requires re-evaluation. When we refuse to change, we refuse to grow (and sometimes the messenger gets left for dead).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)