Tag: Bible

The Last Time

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 19 & 20

Poetry: Proverbs 26

New Testament: Acts 20

     Paul chose to bypass Ephesus based on an urgent drive he felt to be in Jerusalem for Passover, a drive that may have come from God more than himself. He describes himself as “bound by the Spirit” or “bound in spirit” – he is aware the bonds and afflictions await him, but he is not sure that death is near. But he is sure he will never see the Ephesians again. But Paul arranged to meet the church leaders from Ephesus and gave some words of encouragement and warning (Acts 20:18‑35). It is hard to imagine how that meeting must have affected them. A man who basically shaped their community through years of teaching and healing and tears now said he would never see them again, and that some of them would not remain true to the faith. Their greatest concern remained the loss of Paul. They loved and valued him. The news about their future must have been stunning, maybe even sickening, but what could be done? They had already faced opposition. They may even have anticipated that not all who claimed the name of Jesus would stay true to him. But such concerns had to be for later days.

     I wonder what further meanings they drew out of Paul’s words when they looked back on them, not simply as his closing thoughts about his own ministry, but as a commendation about their ministries. Some of his words are so poetic, or they seem so to me: “I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men.For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.” (v. 26-27). Looking back on it I think this may have seemed less a description of Paul’s own life and more a call to them of danger, for if he was innocent for not shrinking from the task, then that raised the threat that some of them who did so might be condemned for doing so. The image Paul offers of leaders becoming corrupt and seeking to build up themselves is an awful one. I would wish it was presented as a warning to them, something to be avoided, but as with Judas this was simply a prediction.

     A note on Acts 20:28: I prepared these devotions mainly using the 1995 NASB, which has the phrase “the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.” Clearly there is a problem here, as God doesn’t have blood. Meanwhile you might have seen this NRSV wording: “the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son.” Or perhaps you read the American Standard Version: “the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood.” Why do these differences exist?

     You may know that the Bibles we read aren’t translated from a single master copy of the Bible in Hebrew and Greek (with a few chapters’ worth of Aramaic). It would be unlikely for a book on paper or papyrus to survive from the first century to today. Instead we have copies of what was written then. And it isn’t easy to prevent all confusion when copying by hand. You could always make just one copy and destroy the original – but that doesn’t remove all risk of errors, though it removes the ability to check if there were any. F.F. Bruce was a well-known Greek scholar, he wrote: “For Caesar’s Gallic War (composed between 58 and 50 B.C.) there are several extant manuscripts, but only nine or ten are good, and the oldest is some 900 years later than Caesar’s day.” People don’t tend to question the text of Gallic War. The text may be wrong if the error got in long enough ago, but we just aren’t going to know.

     The Bible was intended to be spread widely. And because the Bible was used so widely and copied for people in so many parts of the world we have lots of copies, way more than for most things – about 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Having those different manuscripts meant they would get looked at, by language experts who wanted to know if they differed and how they differed. As it turned out almost none of the differences matter. The Church historian Philip Schaff (1819‑1893) wrote that in his time he was aware of only 400 New Testament variants that affected the meaning of a passage, and of those only 50 were of any significance. He didn’t think that any of the 50 rose to the level of affecting an “article of faith” (Companion to the Greek Testament and English Version, p. 177). The figures may be higher now, but it still isn’t something to lose your faith over. There are books (I have one) where committees of language experts evaluate the differences and what they think the situation is for each one.

     Back to Acts 20:28, it is an interesting case for involving two options. Is the issue that the text was changed at some point to say “Church of the God” rather than “Church of the Lord” – maybe because that phrase was more common in the Bible and the copyist thought it was what Luke originally wrote? Or at the end of the sentence was a reference to “son” dropped, changing what would have said “blood of his own son”? You can see here what Philip Schaff was getting at. Everyone agrees that Paul was trying to talk about Jesus here, not the Father, and that something got garbled in some of the manuscripts. It is not clear which of the manuscripts has the original intention, but this is not a big issue of doctrine.

     The matter of manuscripts and translation history can be fascinating, or it may quickly seem overwhelming. Rest assured it is not an area you normally need to concern yourself with if you are not interested in it. (For myself, with my history as an editor, it bothered me that the NASB had not addressed the issue in the verse even with a note.) As one more detail on this history, by the year 600 the gospels had been translated into nine languages. The Gospels were usually the first written literature of these languages. People were creating written forms of their languages just to better spread the news of Jesus to their people. I find that beautiful.

Dear Lord, thank you that you allow us to know about Paul’s struggles, and not just his successes. Help us to be more open with each other about our weaknesses, our tears, our losses. Let us be willing to admit that we need each other. It is more blessed to give than to receive, but if we don’t admit how much we need to receive sometimes people will not know to reach out. And help us, at least, who know that we are weak, to recognize that as a real possibility for others and offer them support and compassion and patience and time. We are not always hurting, but it is hard to make up for missing the opportunity of helping a hurting friend. So let me be more aware, more attentive. Let me listen with your son’s ears. And help me to speak with his words more often. Thank you, Lord. I love you. In Jesus’ name, Amen.

-Daniel Smead

Questions

  1. Why do you think Paul valued meeting with the Ephesian elders? What are some things he may have been hoping for with the meeting?
  2. If you were among the Ephesian elders warned that some of the group would turn against Jesus, what do you think your reaction might be? Do you think that Paul’s statement may have changed how many elders fell, rescuing some?
  3. What do you think the Ephesian elders did when they returned to Ephesus? What kind of message did they have to tell the regular members? How soon?
  4. Did the discussion of manuscripts and translation leave you confused? If so, I’m sorry, email me with your question (danielsmead1993@gmail.com).
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Faith, Not Magic

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 17 & 18

Poetry: Proverbs 25

New Testament: Acts 19

Paul spent over a year and a half in Corinth, probably the fifth largest city in the Roman empire at the time, and in Acts 19 we read about the over two years he spent in Ephesus, which was in fourth place (v. 10; for those who are interested, Antioch was in third). I have seen estimates for Ephesus having as many as a quarter million people when Paul was there. You may not often visualize what it was like in cities of the Roman empire, particularly not in the largest ones, without mass transit or mass communication. Demetrius the silversmith managed to stir up a crowd, which created a mob, that stormed into the theater to complain about Paul. At that time the theater was probably still under construction, its initial seating ended up somewhere in the 17,000 to 22,000 range (the theater was expanded later). When the mass of angry people eventually left most of them were still unclear why they had come. In a mob setting a person could die without ever getting a hearing. You can see why Paul’s friends did not want him to try and defend himself. But perhaps in the days that followed the details filtered out, and God let the aftermath of the controversy give more awareness to the presence of Christianity in Ephesus.

     When I read about handkerchiefs and aprons touched by Paul being carried to the sick and the possessed to give them relief (v. 11-12), I wonder about the practical reasons that may have been involved. He was “reasoning” in the school of Tyrannus every day (v. 9). I have to imagine that Paul would have found it difficult to also travel to all of the people in need of his help in that city. So, this solution developed. Maybe someone suggested the idea to him, or maybe he raised the possibility. The description brings several scriptures to mind. But first we need to recognize that this situation is about faith, not magic. There was not some kind of power being imbued into the cloth, and that matters. Taking the cloth from Paul to the person in need was intended as a symbol of trusting that Paul’s concern for the person mattered for them, which really related to the Holy Spirit power Paul wanted to be exerted on behalf of that person in the name of Jesus.

     For relevant Bible examples one that is close at hand is Peter in Acts 5:15, when people put the sick on cots and pallets near his path so that “perhaps” his shadow would fall on them. It doesn’t suggest Peter was involved in organizing these efforts. Also verse 16 says that healing was occurring, but it is ambiguous whether this is about people Peter’s shadow fell on.

     In Luke 8:43-48 Jesus encountered a woman who had hemorrhaged blood for twelve years and then tried to touch Jesus’ clothes to be healed. She succeeded, and Jesus knew power went out from him but not who received it. That text is well worth a discussion on its own, in part involving the feelings of unworthiness she felt and her not speaking up to Jesus at first, and her great faith that allowed her to seek healing. But she was able to get power by faith without Jesus knowing the details at first – God knew the details and took care of the problem while using Jesus as the path through which God’s power flowed. And in effect it all happened through contact with a piece of cloth.

     In 2 Kings 4 Elisha sent his servant Gehazi with his staff to put it on a dead child to restore the child to life (v. 29-31). The attempt was not successful. We may be tempted to link that to Gehazi’s negative issues (see 5:20, 25-27 with Naaman), but Elisha was already following Gehazi and then became involved more personally to help, so while the desire for this to work was there on Elisha’s part maybe he wasn’t certain about the idea.

     With 2 Kings 13:21 we have a particularly odd variation on a miracle taking place through an “object,” which doesn’t really fit the theme we are discussing. A dead body was put in the grave of Elisha and came back to life when it touched Elisha’s dead body. I think it likely that we are just not getting much of the story here, and that God raised this person for reasons specific to the situation. Perhaps God used the contact with Elisha’s body to make it clear that this was a miracle related to the God of Elisha, and nothing else.

     Unfortunately, examples like these can get taken up in an unhelpful way and be used to support the tradition of “relics.” To briefly explain that idea, sometime after Christians began to be killed as martyrs others began to save remains from their deaths. These remains might be just ashes after they were burned at the stake. The extent of what people tried to save expanded over time, and along the way what people thought about what had been saved also changed. There developed the idea that access to these remains involved the potential for special power, because martyrs were “special” and went straight to heaven when they died – and that being in heaven and with God they were now prepared to give special attention to those who had access to their bones, or hair, or teeth, or clothing, or etc. And the relic system expanded beyond what the martyr had when they died – every one of those handkerchiefs and aprons Paul touched would still matter. The idea also developed that if the relics changed hands the special attention of the martyr would change focus to wherever the relics went. It is striking how aspects of this tradition came to be formalized.

     The Council of Carthage in A.D. 401 determined that no shrines to martyrs were valid unless they contained relics of the martyr or were at sites known to be “hallowed” by the saint’s life or death, so all old shrines were to be destroyed unless those rules applied. In 787 the Second Council of Nicea said that every altar, in a church, a monastery, anywhere, needed to be consecrated by a relic. But by then it had been decided that a relic cut into small pieces still counted like the original whole. As far back as A.D. 430 Theodoret of Cyrhus expressed his support for cutting up the bodies of martyrs to provide relics. He described martyrs as the “ambassadors to the universal Lord” and said that the people of many cities gain benefits through them and “when a body has been divided, its grace remains entire, so that a small part has the same potency as the whole body” (quoted in The Oxford History of Byzantium, edited by Cyril Mango, p. 108). On the other hand the idea of moving martyr’s bodies around had not been accepted widely for quite a while, but it seems to have been fine as of 787. The fondness for relics peaked in the 9th to the 11th centuries when there were over one hundred recorded thefts of relics, taking them from one area to another in an effort to shift spiritual attention.

     As I wrote earlier, the power that was working in Ephesus was never in the cloth, the power was from God’s Holy Spirit. And there are not thousands of ambassadors of the Lord from whom people can seek to receive assistance, there is one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5). Nor, as the seven sons of Sceva learned, is there power in the name of Jesus if you have no understanding of him or faith in him. His name is not a magic charm. We are to have an actual relationship with an actual person. When we read our Bibles, or even our devotions, it may sometimes feel like we are involving ourselves with a story. But as marvelous and powerful as the actions of Jesus are, and as generous and loving as his actions are, he is not invented, he lives, he is real. He wants to be engaged with my life and your life. Allow him to be.

Dear Lord, thank you again for allowing me to serve you through your son. I look forward to being with you in your kingdom and understanding so many things that I do not understand now. For the moment, please allow me to be patient, to continue to grow, and to be of use where I can. Please help me to be bolder, and kinder. Thank you. In Jesus’ name, Amen

-Daniel Smead

Questions

  1. Some of the people Paul knew may have spent their entire ministries in just one city. How do you think things worked differently for Paul because he moved around so much?
  2. How do you think that Luke’s description of the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus compares with his description of Apollos? Does it seem like they believed basically the same things?
  3. If new converts brought out useless and somehow corrupt things valued at 50,000 days’ wages (v. 19) to be burned as a sign of now serving Christ, what sort of impact do you think that would have on your congregation? On your city?
  4. Right after the events of this chapter Paul left Ephesus. How do you think the Ephesian believers felt about Paul leaving the city?
  5. In Revelation 2:4-5 Jesus told the Ephesian church that they had left their first love and they needed to repent and do the deeds they did at first. From what you see in the chapter, what would you guess Jesus might be referring to?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Learning More About the Way of God

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 15 & 16

Poetry: Proverbs 24

*New Testament: Acts 18

     In Acts 18 Luke mentioned several workers active in the Church with Paul, giving background for some. It may miss our attention at first, but we don’t know if Aquila and Priscilla were already Christian disciples when they were exiled from Rome (v. 2-3). They were not just fellow tentmakers with Paul, he highly praised them, and a church met in their home (Romans 16:3-5). We know that Egyptians and Romans were present for the Pentecost event (Acts 2:10), so we should expect that some from those areas were present at every festival Jesus attended and perhaps learned from him all along. Logically people from those areas were present during the time John the Baptist ministered as well. There could have been people with imperfect understandings of God’s plans scattered across the empire, and outside it, waiting to encounter disciples. Alexandria was the second largest city in the empire (next to Rome) and had a very large Jewish population. No Bible book relates events there, so it basically disappears from our awareness. Apollos, from Alexandria, knew about Jesus, his identity and resurrection, but he missed some details involved with serving Jesus – particularly not having been baptized into Jesus’ death and resurrection. Fortunately, Apollos met Priscilla and Aquila and they were able to take him aside and help him by explaining “the way of God more accurately.” This allowed Apollos to then be of great use to those who believed, through grace (v. 27-28).

     It is hard to visualize quite what version of belief Apollos was getting by with before he met Priscilla and Aquila. He still valued his understanding as coming from God, and wanted to share it, as John the Baptist had done. We know he was teaching accurately “the things concerning Jesus,” but what does that leave out? Was he still depending on the Law to carry him along? He understood the idea of repenting, but did he have an idea of how he was supposed to arrive at forgiveness? Perhaps Apollos simply trusted God and moved forward, expecting things to become clear. We can be thankful that he did.

     Dear Lord, thank you that as your servant I am not left uncertain about being forgiven. Please help me not to put any of the old weight of sin back on myself, let me accept that the past is in the past. Thank you for the opportunity to serve you, in whatever way it comes. Please help me to grow, not to accept staying as I am, but to seek to be more useful for you and for your people. Prompt me to accept the opportunities that come to me which are within my capacities. Help me to recognize your will. In the name of your son, Jesus, Amen.

-Daniel Smead

Questions:

  1. What do you think it would mean for someone to try to live their life as a Christian aware of Jesus, and having repented, but without the Spirit? Do you think there is a limit on how long that would be able to last, or what a person could face and still attempt it?
  2. Does it surprise you that Apollos was trying to spread the news he had, even though it was incomplete?
  3. What do you see represented in the fact that Priscilla and Aquila “took Apollos aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately”? How do you visualize that event taking place? How long do you think it took, for example? How do you think they introduced themselves?
  4. How often do you think about the fact that on a given day your situation may not be the most important, but someone else you are interacting with may greatly need your attention?
  5. Do you think much about the idea that people today are trying to serve God with what they understand, and they are waiting to encounter someone willing to help them see the truth more clearly? Are you living in a way where you would feel open to speaking for Jesus if you meet one of those people?

(Sorry this wasn’t sent out til now…I thought it was posted this morning but it appears I shut my computer lid too quickly, or some other technical issue…here’s another try…)

sgl23bibleplanDownload

Great Expectations

Unmet

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 11 & 12

Poetry: Proverbs 22

New Testament: Acts 16

     You can look at today’s chapter as about expectations, being anticipated, met, shifted, and subverted. For example, it might surprise us to read that Timothy was circumcised (v. 3) – we just went over this, and circumcision was ruled out, right? But circumcision was restricted for Christians as a religious choice involving the Law. This text shows it being chosen as a surgical procedure, to avoid offending Jews who believed Timothy should have been circumcised when he was a child. Timothy chose this just to be less objectionable and let the message of Jesus be conveyed better. Paul later described him as a “kindred spirit who will genuinely be concerned for your welfare” (Philippians 2:20).

     Paul had intended to revisit the places he and Barnabas went (15:36) but Barnabas set off with John Mark, at least going to Crete. Paul went a different route and was probably quite surprised after a while that God was not permitting him to speak the gospel. When he received a vision calling him to Macedonia (north of Greece) he accepted this and entered Europe, where he hadn’t expected to travel. It has been pointed out that Acts 15 marks a transition point in the mission account when we hear less about Jewish people coming into the Church, and more about Gentiles. Paul could have continued traveling to where large groups of Jews lived, but before long he is in Philippi where it seems there were very few Jews, or at least few Jewish men. It took ten Jewish men to set up a synagogue, and apparently Philippi lacked this, but Paul’s group located a Jewish “place of prayer” by the river – they were often by the water.

     One of God’s favorite things may be subverting our expectations, whether by using weak people to achieve a victory, or turning a persecutor into an evangelist, or having us confront our own prejudices. As a Pharisee Paul would have been taught to pray each day “I thank you, Lord, that you did not create me a slave, a woman or a Gentile.” I’ve been told that the meaning of the prayer isn’t as extreme as it first sounds, that the point was how any of those three categories would limit access at the Temple and drawing closer to God. But still, it seems like such a prayer would tend to affect one’s ideas on the importance of people to God. And, the way Luke tells it, as Paul and Silas began their ministry in Europe the first three people they reached were a woman, a slave girl, and a Gentile. (This understanding of the text was pointed out to me in The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, edited by Catherine Clark Kroeger and Mary J. Evans.)

     While Lydia was likely wealthy, since she was selling a luxury item like purple cloth, it seems that the Jewish community in Philippi lacked political influence. The owners of the slave girl who was helped by Paul were willing to unjustly push around her houseguests, though they did gather a crowd before going to the authorities with their claims. Paul didn’t seem important to them, and these officials were all too ready to accept the accusation that he was proclaiming customs it wasn’t lawful for Romans to accept or observe.

     After the earthquake struck and opened the prison doors the jailer was ready to kill himself because when a prisoner escaped a Roman jailer’s custody he was subject to whatever sentence that prisoner was to receive – with so many prisoners in his jail he must have thought it impossible to survive the collective punishments. In this story Paul and Silas seem like Joseph in a night, so impressing their fellow prisoners with their songs and their attitudes that they managed to convince them to behave according to their best selves in the situation and wait to learn what would happen. Or perhaps the other prisoners were cowed and afraid, like the sailors on Jonah’s ship in the middle of the turmoil, and they, too, had asked what they needed to do to be saved. Whatever the exact situation, when the jailer learned they all were still there he was ready to accept that Paul and Silas were falsely accused. And in the morning the local officials were likewise prepared to accept that a wrong had been done, but they wanted it to be swept aside. This is one of several times that Paul’s Roman citizenship benefited him, and it makes you wonder how government officials were so careless about not checking in advance who they might be abusing. The initial order for release may have been due to fear, related to the earthquake, or it may have been recognition that the actions already taken were outside the law, but the response to knowing Paul was a citizen was probably a good lesson to them. We can hope it put some lasting caution into their minds for future interactions with the new community of believers in Philippi, and that it helped to encourage the community that God was watching over them.

     Lord, thank you that Paul was willing to leave his expected course to get where you wanted him to be. Please help me be willing to take the course you want me to take. Please help me to accept your guidance. Help me to seek it and desire it, and not fear it. Give me strength and trust to rejoice in the Lord always, amen.

-Daniel Smead

Reflection Questions

  1. How much do you think it helped Paul and Silas to be locked in prison together?
  2. If you were locked in prison for serving Jesus, do you think you would sing hymns of praise to God? I think that with Paul and Silas as our examples we may be likely to say we can do that. But is it sometimes harder to glorify God in more “normal” situations, so that they wear you down over time? Recognize that you are a child of God, and that we don’t see all that is going on. Isn’t every situation potentially the lead up to something extraordinary? Joseph was a kid being mistreated by his siblings. Hannah was a childless woman, being picked on by a rival, for years. Don’t reject them as examples because they are famous Bible characters, it may have been their faithfulness while they were unaware of what would happen that led to what happened next. Recall that we don’t know what Lydia had been praying for, her role in this story may be much larger than we realize.
  3. As you think about the people in the chapter, what connections do you make to your own life?
  4. Having thought about Acts 16 today, how will you look at your life differently?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Dispute and Debate

In the Church

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 9 & 10

Poetry: Proverbs 21

* New Testament: Acts 15

      Being a Christian isn’t about being able to apply clear rules to every situation. But sometimes believers wish for more rules to go by, and sometimes they even make the mistake of trying to apply their own rules to others.

     The intense dispute about circumcision reported in Acts 15:1-2 sounds like it could have taken place in the Gospels, between Jesus and some of his opponents (for example about clean and unclean food). But this argument didn’t end with a parable and an attack on false teaching. Rather the church in Antioch sent representatives to Jerusalem to discuss the issue with people who would be influential on the group from Judea that began the conflict, and so able to convince them to end it.

     The idea that circumcision is necessary for Christians doesn’t carry much weight with us. But circumcision was the symbol of God’s covenant with Abram, setting him apart (Genesis 17:10‑14). To join the Jewish people men underwent circumcision. There were also examples of circumcision being put off for a time, as when the Hebrew nation went through the wilderness (Joshua 5:2‑9). So an ex‑Pharisee might have argued that a believer’s expression of faith in Jesus didn’t mean all the requirements for salvation were met, until circumcision was complete (they could even point out that Peter called for Cornelius to be baptized after he showed signs of the Spirit, he didn’t say that baptism ought to be skipped; Acts 10:47).

     During the meeting at Jerusalem the discussion was about the fact that circumcision committed people to obey the law of Moses. Paul and Barnabas had already been preaching that Jesus “freed from all things which you could not be freed from through the law of Moses” (Acts 13:39). And here was being presented the Law as an add-on which believers would be unable to do, and only be troubled by attempting to do (15:5, 10, 19).

     James, the half-brother of Jesus, suggested an alternative which still had four issues to avoid: things contaminated by idols, fornication, what is strangled and blood. Why these? It has been suggested that these were thought to be basic issues that would allow for Jewish believers and Gentile believers to interact and eat together. The first involved the source of food, as a lot of meat sold in the markets was provided from temples, being the extra cuts from their sacrifices. The source would not be obvious once a meal was being served but would have made a dish unacceptable for some while being fine for others. The last two items are basically the same issue – strangling an animal meant leaving its blood in it when butchering it. Again this would not be visible but would be objectionable to some diners. The remaining issue of fornication involved willingness to be involved with a variety of sexual activities, some linked to religious purposes, that were commonly accepted outside Jewish society. So James was saying in this case that the new Christians probably needed a special reminder to separate themselves from these things because of what they would have been used to.

     When these four issues were put into a letter it was framed that “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these . . . . if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well.” (v. 28-29). The standards were not being stated in the strongest of terms. And those who started the problem are described as not having received instruction on the issue, but the point is also made that the group in Jerusalem has only now become “of one mind” about it themselves. No big accusations, no rejections. These people are still “some of our number”, and presumably they were spoken with by Judas and Silas (if they were still in the area) and guided because they didn’t understand yet. It had taken a vision to prepare Peter for his meeting with the uncircumcised Cornelius, and it took the filling of the Spirit to show that Cornelius was ready for baptism without circumcision (Acts 10:47). And we aren’t that clear how widely Peter had been going around reporting on his experience since then trying to spread awareness of his new insight so that others would be up-to-date on the standards regarding Gentiles. Change can be slow.

     The issue of food sacrificed to idols comes up again in Paul’s writings, more than once. 1 Corinthians 8, for example, says that a person’s conscience should determine how they behave on this issue. This does not mean it is unimportant. Revelation 2:20, in one of the seven letters to the seven churches, reports the condemnation of a false prophet for leading astray some of Jesus’ disciples. One of the offenses the prophet committed was causing them to eat food sacrificed to idols (presumably in violation of their consciences).         

     The chapter has another sad note, because some time after having returned to Antioch Paul and Barnabas found they could no longer work together due to disagreeing over whether to trust John Mark anymore. He had left them once and Paul didn’t want to let him work with them again (Acts 13:13). Maybe Paul considered that Mark had “put his hand to the plow and looked back,” and was not fit for the kingdom (Luke 9:62). The thing is, I’m not sure how many people start off “fit for the kingdom.” Eventually Paul and Mark worked together again, and Paul valued him greatly (2 Timothy 4:11).

     Lord, please let your peace rule over our hearts even in our disagreements. Please help us not to quarrel with each other, whatever the provocation. Let us show that we care for each other, and be willing to give up our own interests for each other rather than fight. Let us care even if we are angered to commit to become calm and truly give our attention each to the other, and to care for and honor each other. Let us not lie to one another, and let us believe each other. Let people truly recognize that we belong to you because of how we love. In the name of your son Jesus I ask this, Amen.

-Daniel Smead

Questions:

  1. We have simple goals as Christians, like to love and to bring peace. (I didn’t say “easy goals.”) How often do you find yourself converting your goals into following rules? How can you fight against that impulse?
  2. Do you think that the discussions in Acts 15 ended the disputes about circumcision in the church?
  3. The conflict between Paul and Barnabas divided their efforts and had them cover different areas. Do you think that their conflict was beneficial? Or do you think if they had gotten along better God would also have done equally great things through them?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Paul’s God

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 7 & 8

Poetry: Proverbs 20

New Testament: Acts 14

As we look at chapter 14 of Acts, we are going to go back to the idea that one way we can learn is by studying what isn’t said. This chapter becomes even more unique and interesting when you look at it from this perspective. In context with the surrounding chapters, Paul and Barnabas are traveling to Jewish synagogues in order to convince the Jews that Jesus is the Messiah. This chapter is no different; the Jews are still stubborn and are stirring up the crowd and even trying to kill them. But when Paul saw a lame man who had the faith to be healed, he immediately healed him through the power of God. Their message is interrupted by the people claiming that Paul and Barnabas are gods who have come down to earth. This was common Greek mythology of the time.  At the sound of this accusation, Paul and Barnabas immediately reject its legitimacy and instead give the one true living God the glory.

Paul describes the power of God and all the things that He has done for His creation. Paul takes a little intermission from the message of Jesus in order to stand up for the name of Yahweh. From a Trinitarian perspective, Paul’s approach should raise some red flags because he failed to mention how God “came to earth”. If Paul held trinitarian beliefs, then he would have used this as a preaching opportunity to connect the name of Jesus to the pagan beliefs of gods visiting earth. If I were Paul, and for the sake of the argument, I was theoretically a Trinitarian, then I would have told the crowd, “Hey, I’m only a human but the real God did come down to Earth, but you rejected him!” This would have been a Trinitarians’ dream opportunity to take the crowds’ presuppositions about gods coming to earth and use it to present Jesus as God in human form. Logically, this would allow Paul to connect with their understanding of gods and use it to preach the true God. Instead, he didn’t mention a human form of God, neither does he even mention Jesus at all. But instead, the issue at hand in the mind of Paul is solely on rejecting the crowds claims and giving all the glory to God. Jesus did not even cross his mind, instead he was focused on defending the authority and power of God. But it is not as if Paul said the wrong thing or missed an incredible opportunity to share the gospel. In fact, Paul even urges the crowd to turn from “these worthless things to the living God”. The only possible ‘worthless things’ that the crowd was discussing in this chapter was that the “gods have come down to us in human form”. Therefore, it seems that Paul is urging the crowd to disregard their pagan and Greek mythological beliefs about God and believe in the God who created the heavens and earth. 

And when you combine this argument with the argument that Paul did not correct the Jews on their understanding of the Messiah, along with the fact that Paul never explains the Trinity, then I would consider it to be enough evidence to suggest that Paul did not hold Trinitarian beliefs. If we believe that the Bible is God’s inspired word to reveal himself to His creation, then it seems like we should be able to see God being accurately revealed.

Acts is the perfect book to study how Paul and the other apostles preach and reveal God and the Messiah to the crowds. We can learn so much from the theological lessons found in the book of Acts, hopefully you can keep an eye out for more theological truths as you continue through the book. 

-Makayla Railton

Reflection Questions

  1. In Acts 14 Paul is stoned and left for dead – and then continues on with his missionary journey – sharing the good news. What is so important about the message he is preaching? Is it that important to you?
  2. What can you learn about Paul’s God from his preaching (and what he didn’t preach) and from his life? Do you worship the same God?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

New Testament in Context

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 5 & 6

Poetry: Proverbs 19

New Testament: Acts 13

The entire Bible can be traced back to Genesis 3 where we see the fall of man from the paradise that God had desired for His creation. From this foundation we can then add Genesis 12 where God calls Abraham and gives his descendants the promise of a future land and nation. And in chapter 49 of Genesis, we see God promise a leader through the line of Judah. Throughout the Bible we see common themes continually come back and connect to these three promises. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy focus on the establishment of the people into a nation with a complete constitution. The book of Joshua tells the tales of battles fought to conquer the land. And the books of Ezra and Nehemiah record the restoration of the nation of Israel to the land after the exile. And the other books follow a story of attempts to find a leader who is good enough to sit on the throne forever. 

In chapter 13 of Acts, Paul uses a very similar tactic of preaching the gospel to the Jews. The Jews would have understood the promises of a land, nation, and a leader, and they also knew that they were ultimately waiting for the leader — the Messiah. Therefore, Paul presents the history of the Israelites starting with when God led the people out of Egypt and going through the period of the Judges and then Kings. 

Paul highlighted a couple leaders in his overview, but they all turned out to be sinful. Even seemingly good men who sat on the throne made mistakes that did not reflect the leader the world needed. Another problem with these leaders is that they all ended up dead. Paul brings up this point in verse 36-37 when he says, “Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed. But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.” He does this to clearly contrast Jesus from the other leaders that the Jewish people adored like David. His purpose was to convince them that the Jesus they killed was the Messiah because God raised Him from the dead so that he would not see decay. Paul knew that the best way to prove this to the Jews was to use scriptures like Isaiah 55:3 and Psalm 16:10 to make his point. He also mentions that Jesus was seen by many witnesses after God raised him from the dead. 

Throughout his sermon to the Jews, he makes a clear distinction between God and Jesus. For example, he states that God was the source of the power that raised Jesus from the dead. He also uses the titles of Father and Son to describe the relationship between God and Jesus. 

The result of this sermon is that many Jews and Gentiles received Jesus as the Messiah. They asked Paul to return and preach again the following Sabbath. But the message also faced opposition by the Jews who were jealous of Paul’s preaching and his popularity among the crowds. In response, Paul goes back to Isaiah and quotes 49:6 in order to prove to the Jews the prophecy of the Gentiles being included into the promises of God. This sermon caused even more persecution for the early church but nonetheless the truth was spread throughout the entire region and both Jews and Gentiles came to believe in Jesus. 

-Makayla Railton

Reflection Questions

  1. What does this tell us about the importance of the Old Testament as the context for the New Testament?
  2. Would you say that you have a good understanding of the Old Testament? Or is this something that you could spend more time studying?
  3. Why do you think some of the Jews accepted the truth of Paul’s sermon while others became jealous?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Herod’s Plans vs. God’s Plans

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 3 & 4

Poetry: Proverbs 18

*New Testament: Acts 12

The Bible was written for the purpose of revealing theological lessons. Throughout the whole Bible we can see cross references and common themes that unite every book into God’s complete and perfect word that he wrote for His creation. There are times when the Bible seems to be more historical or moralistic, but overall, everything can be tied back to a theological lesson on who God is and how we can have a relationship with Him. We can learn so much about the character of God. We can also see how a passage of scripture fits into the big picture of God’s plan of restoring the world to what it was in the garden of Eden. 

Acts chapter 12 records Peter’s miraculous escape from prison. This comes in the middle of the apostles and the early church being under persecution by the Jews, and right after the apostle James became a martyr for the sake of proclaiming Jesus as the Messiah. Verse 3 says that King Herod arrested Peter once he saw how much the Jews supported the execution of James. The Jews did everything they could to resist the early church from growing. But here we see God step in and provide protection to Peter because of all the work that God had chosen in advance for him to complete. We just learned in the previous chapters that Peter was the disciple that God specifically assigned to proclaim Jesus to the Gentiles and extend salvation to them. 

This shows how important the message of the Messiah Jesus is to God. God was prepared to intervene and open and close doors in order for Jesus to continue to be proclaimed. No tactics of man, neither from the Jews nor royalty could thwart the plans of God. God’s will will come to pass. God provided a way for Peter to escape prison – and all without him even understanding what was happening. This happens all too often because God is all-knowing, and we are limited in our knowledge as humans. 

When you first look at the account of Herod’s death, it simply looks like a historical record of a king. But is there a theological lesson that is beneath the surface? What was the point of including this story in this chapter of Acts? Well first of all, in this case, there is significance from a historical perspective because we can see a very similar account written by the Jewish historian Josephus. The historian recorded that Herod was compared to a god and did not reject the claim and therefore died. This can be used as proof of the accuracy of the Bible and the information recorded in it. The Bible is real and can be accepted as truth. But when it comes to a theological message, we can see that God is a jealous God who does not put up with idol worship. It’s sad how the Jewish people refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah, yet they were so quick to exalt Herod Agrippa to the status of a god. Men cannot come close to being worthy of the glory of God, God deserves it all. Herod Agrippa was the grandson of King Herod the Great, who ordered the killing of the baby boys at the time of Jesus’ birth. Herod Agrippa was also the nephew of the Herod who beheaded John the Baptist. Therefore Herod grew up surrounded by influences that persecuted those who followed God, yet God consistently found a way around the plans of these men so that the name of Jesus could be proclaimed. 

The chapter ends with a common theme of the whole book of Acts. It says, “But the word of God continued to spread and flourish.” Herod did not have enough power to overcome his fate nor the spread of the name of Jesus. Instead, we see the minuteness of Herod compared to God. By the end of this single chapter, we are reminded that God is playing a game of chess while all His enemies are stuck playing checkers. He has all his moves planned out and he can see how the game ends when it will all come to fruition. 

-Makayla Railton

Reflection Questions

  1. Where have you seen God’s plan trump man’s plans? Is everything that happens part of God’s plan?
  2. How can we work at being a part of God’s plan rather than going against it?
  3. What else can we learn about God in our Bible reading today?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Jew vs. Gentile

Old Testament: 2 Samuel 1 & 2

Poetry: Proverbs 17

New Testament: Acts 11

We pick it back up in Acts with chapters 10 and 11 that tell a story and then the retelling of the same story. These chapters play an integral part in the big picture of God’s plan.  It’s the beginning of the fulfillment of the part of the New Covenant that extends God’s promises to the Gentiles. It was a turning point for the early church because it recorded the moment that Gentiles were officially accepted as children of God. Peter was given a vision that all food was clean because it was made by God. This represents the changes from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Therefore, the Jewish Christians are no longer under the same laws that was presented to the Israelites in the Old Covenant. Now, the church could include the uncircumcised and non-Mosaic law followers. Additionally, we see the Gentiles receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit and the different gifts that come with God’s power. Now, God-fearing Gentiles no longer have to be excluded on the basis of not being circumcised or under the law. This message from God was aimed to unite those who followed God and believed in Jesus. This allowed the Jewish Christians and the Gentiles who feared God and professed Jesus as their Messiah to be united together under the New Covenant.

This was such an important message because the Jews prided themselves on being an exclusive group that looked down on those who were uncircumcised and not under the Mosaic law. Romans 3 addresses this issue that the Jews struggled with. Paul comes to the conclusion that both Jews and Gentiles are sinful and equally in need of a Savior. This concept should have greatly humbled the Jews because of how they perceived their status as God’s chosen people. They elevated themselves and compared their ‘righteousness’ to the wickedness of the world. What they didn’t fully comprehend was that God holds those who know more about Him to higher standards. God presented his people with the Mosaic law and a contract in Deuteronomy 28 that is full of blessings and curses that God would distribute depending on how the Israelites obeyed God. The final and worst curse was being exiled to a foreign nation. And from this side of history, we know that the Israelites were in fact sent into exile because of the faithlessness of Israel, and worse even, the unfaithfulness of Judah. The ten northern tribes of Israel were exiled in 722 B.C. by Assyria and the southern two tribes of Judah were exiled in 586 B.C. by Babylon.

Even during the exile though, God was still working for the good of Israel. His prophet Jeremiah prophesied about the future hope of a New Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31 says, “ ‘The days are coming’, declares the LORD, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them’, declares the LORD. ‘This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,’ declares the LORD. ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.” This clearly shows that the New Covenant was intended for the Jewish people first. God desires hearts that are devoted to Him. The Jews broke the first covenant with their disobedience and worship of idols. So, God created the plan of sending Jesus to establish a New Covenant by dying on the cross. But the Jews rejected this Messiah that God sent. As a result, this New Covenant focused more on the heart of the recipient. It was based on loving God and accepting Jesus as Christ instead of following the Mosaic law. Therefore, the Gentiles who loved God and accepted Jesus as the Messiah automatically became equals to the Jewish Christians. God cares much more about the heart than he does about statuses.

The complete unification of God’s people will ultimately be fulfilled in the Kingdom when all nations, tongues, and tribes will be represented. Revelation 5:9 says, “And they sang a new song, saying, ‘You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God.’ ”

Peter was chosen for the task of preaching to the Gentiles and convincing the Jews that God had included the Gentiles in his promises. He sums it up in chapter 10:34 by saying, “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right.”

The big theological lesson from these chapters is that God desires all people to be in His Kingdom, so He extends his love and grace to the Gentiles. His desire all along was that Israel would be witnesses of God to the world and would bring the nations to Him. But the Israelites found out early on that it was very difficult to bring others to God when you are not following God wholeheartedly yourselves. This did not keep them from repeating the same mistakes. This does not mean that the church or the Gentiles replaced Israel. Instead, these two chapters present the extension of the New Covenant to the Gentiles even though it is still offered to any Jew who would accept Jesus.

Through studying the relationship between the Jews and the Gentiles in regard to the New Covenant, we can see that both are still offered the blessings and promises of the New Covenant. The Jews were not pushed out of the New Covenant at the inclusion of the Gentiles. Thankfully, God has enough blessings to give to all those who love and follow Him wholeheartedly and believe in His Son.

-Makayla Railton

Reflection Questions

  1. How would this vision from God change the whole structure of the early church?
  2. How do these chapters help us put the rest of the Bible in perspective?
sgl23bibleplanDownload

Trusting in the Guidance of the Lord

Old Testament: 1 Samuel 29-31

Poetry: Proverbs 16

New Testament: Acts 10

In the book of Proverbs, we find a treasure trove of wisdom that has the power to transform our lives. Chapter 16 is no exception, offering profound insights that speak directly to our hearts and the way we navigate this world. Today, let us take a closer look at verse 3, which encourages us to commit our work to the Lord, knowing that He is the one who establishes our plans.

In a society driven by achievement and self-reliance, it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that success is solely dependent on our own abilities and strategies. We may spend countless hours meticulously crafting our plans and pursuing our goals, forgetting that we are called to acknowledge God’s sovereignty and seek His guidance in all that we do. However, Proverbs reminds us that true success comes from surrendering our efforts to the Lord.

Committing our work to the Lord involves recognizing that He is the ultimate authority and the source of all wisdom and understanding. It requires us to approach our tasks, aspirations, and dreams with an attitude of humility, acknowledging that apart from Him, we can do nothing of lasting significance. We are called to submit our plans to His will, seeking His guidance and trusting that He will align our desires with His purposes.

By entrusting our work to God, we are liberated from the burden of self-reliance and the anxiety that often accompanies it. We can rest in the assurance that the Lord, in His infinite wisdom and love, will establish our plans. This does not mean that we will be exempt from challenges or difficulties along the way, but it does mean that God will faithfully guide us, direct our steps, and use our efforts for His glory.

When we commit our work to the Lord, we invite Him to be an active participant in every aspect of our lives. We open ourselves up to His guidance and leading, allowing Him to shape our plans according to His perfect will. Our work becomes an opportunity to partner with God, to be instruments through which His purposes are fulfilled in this world.

As we reflect on Proverbs chapter 16, may we be encouraged to surrender our ambitions, our dreams, and our work to the Lord. Let us seek His wisdom, trust in His guidance, and find peace in knowing that He is the one who establishes our plans. By entrusting ourselves to Him, we embark on a journey of purpose and fulfillment, where our lives become a testament to His grace and faithfulness.

-Austin Kizer

Reflection Questions

  1. In what areas of your life would it be wise to surrender your plans to the Lord? What does that look like? What thoughts and feelings does it create? Pray for help in doing so.
  2. What does true success look like? Is it possible apart from God and His plans?
  3. What will God reveal to you about Himself in your Bible reading today?
sgl23bibleplanDownload
%d bloggers like this: