Matthew 1-2: The Birth of Christ

Discussion of the lineage and birth of Christ as well as the star signifying His birth and the gifts given to Him.

Lineage

Matthew starts off with the lineage and birth of Christ. Lineage was a major deal to the Israelites, in fact, in most societies bloodlines are very important. Several verses in the Bible articulate that the life of a person is in their blood. Our blood defines us—no, I'm not referring to blue blood or other worldly definitions. I'm referring to the very cells within our blood. The DNA contained in these cells is like a computer program that controls how we interact with the world around us. I don't want to get sidetracked, so if you want to know more about the life in the blood, check out my podcast episode on the topic.[8] The main point I'm making here is bloodlines are more than just wealth and worldly power passed down generation to generation, it's also Godly covenants passed from seed to seed. Because of this, the Jews meticulously kept up with bloodlines, searching for the promised seed (Genesis 3:15) that would defeat Satan.

The lineage presented in Matthew traces back to Abraham, and identifies Christ as a legitimate descendant of David with rights to the throne of Israel. That would be the end of the story, except Luke gives a very different lineage. There are many theories about why this is, which I've already covered in my post Harmonizing the Gospels: the Lineage of Christ. I don't want to be redundant, so I'm not going to go into detail about the lineage. I will say that there are multiple theories discussed in the post, and I fall in the camp of those who believe one lineage is that of Joseph (a legal justification for Christ's lineage) and one is that of Mary (a true bloodline lineage). Nonetheless, the early Church did not contest the written accounts, nor cry foul about such a glaring mistake; therefore regardless of why they are different, I am confident that the disciples and early church understood both of these lineages to be correct and valid.

Christ is Born

Matthew doesn't go into as much detail about the birth of Christ as Luke, but he does give us a few details to think about.

Mary & Joseph

When I look at the scenario of Mary and Joseph, I can't help but imagine this in today's crazy society. Can you imagine preparing for a wedding and finding out your fiancee is pregnant and you've never slept with her? While, I suspect how people external to the situation saw it would vary in our time (considering that premarital sex has been normalized, most would just assume it was Joseph's baby), the internal struggle each person experienced would have been very similar in today's time.

Today, Mary probably wouldn't worry about "slut shaming" or being condemned for having sex outside of marriage (depending on what circle she traveled in), but she would still be faced with the impossible task of convincing Joseph she hadn't been unfaithful. How crazy does it sound to say "I promise I'm a virgin...An angel told me I was carrying the Son of God, that's why I'm pregnant"? That probably sounded crazy then too. The only reason Joseph believed her is because the angel visited Joseph as well. Had Joseph not been visited by the angel, he would have left her. Sticking with the culture of Mary's time, her parents would have been furious if she'd gone to them; an illegitimate pregnancy would eliminate most decent prospects in marriage. Mary had to step out on faith that God would work things out. We aren't told how many people knew this information or how deep into the pregnancy she was when she got married, so we don't know how people around her reacted (if they reacted at all) but when she accepted what the angel told her, she had to accept the possibility that she would never be accepted into society again.

From the text, we know that Joseph was definitely not convinced by whatever Mary said (and who could blame him!?). It took an angel confirming that matter (as it should) for him to settle in to his role, but what is interesting is how Joseph intended to handle it. He could have been bitter and nasty about it; he could have made a spectacle of her. However, Joseph had resolved to handle the issue discreetly. This is a clear depiction of the man God chose to raise His son.

Both Mary and Joseph's reactions to the situation are indicative of why God chose them in the first place. Aside from being descendants of David to fulfill the prophecy, both bore the fruit of the Holy Spirit. God was entrusting this couple with His only son; He had to know they would make good parents.

The Wise Men & The Star

One of the most popular aspects of the birth of Christ is that of the star. One thing I could never understand as a child was why only the magi saw the star. Herod seems utterly baffled at its appearance and can't determine how old the child is based on the information. If the star was abnormally bright, wouldn't Herod have seen it and remembered? The cartoon-ish way Christians portray this element as a large gleaming star hanging above the manger is ridiculous and clearly false. A more likely scenario is that a sign played out in the heavens (see Genesis 1:14 for the purpose of the stars to be signs).

In some translations, the men who come to see Christ are the "magi" in others they are called "wise men." The original Greek is μαγοζ, which was a term applied to "the wise men, teachers, priests, physicians, astrologers, seers, interpreters of dreams, augurs, soothsayers, sorcerers, etc." in that culture. We can already see why some translators favored the term wise men, a term that could encompass many of the other terms. A compelling theory I've run across leans toward them being "astrologers."

I use the term astrologers loosely because there's context that needs to be applied here. In Matthew's day, anyone who studied the stars in any form or capacity was an "astrologer." Today, we have to terms for people concerned with the stars: astronomer or astrologer. Astronomers study the movement, behavior, life/death and inner workings of stars, while astrologers seek to connect those things to how events play out on earth. If you grew up in church you were probably taught that astrology is bad. I want to challenge that notion a bit wit this Bible verse:

¹⁴Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and they shall serve as signs and for seasons, and for days and years; ¹⁵and they shall serve as lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. ¹⁶God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. ¹⁷God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, ¹⁸and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. ¹⁹And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. Genesis 1:14-19 NASB

In Genesis 1:14 we are told that God created lights in the sky not just for seasons and tracking time, but also for signs. So there is some relevance to "reading the stars." The thing to keep in mind is that it is not the stars making things happen. The stars are merely testifying to what God has already spoken (Psalm 19). Keep that in mind as you read what I'm about to type.

There is a theory that the star referenced in Matthew 1 is actually the behavior of a star over time (there are also theories about conjunctions of planets forming a really bright star, but that goes back to my question of why no one else seemed to notice). Many cultures have a zodiac and while they may ascribe slightly different names, the constellations are fairly consistent. One of the signs in the zodiac is Leo, the Lion. The lion was connected with the tribe of Judah and is connected to the Messiah (Who is the Lion and the Lamb). The brightest star (well, star system, but it appears as a single star to the naked eye) in Leo is called Regulus which comes from the Latin rex and means "little king."[1] Also in the sky is the planet Jupiter, which isn't a star but does appear as a light in the sky. Jupiter is named after the Roman god who was "king of the gods;" it was regarded as the king planet. Some who've studied the stars have identified interesting interplay with these three signs in the sky around the time of Christ's birth. This behavior is as follows: Jupiter (the king planet) passes through the lion near Regulus (the king star), goes in to retrograde (which mean it appears to go backwards, passing Regulus in the opposite direction), then crosses Regulus again. This pattern would have taken quite some time to complete, but the wise men would have seen the king planet "crown" the king star in the lion. It's not hard to see how that would be interpreted as the Messiah (the lion of Judah) being born (little king); especially if you were familiar with prophecy and understood the 70 weeks of Daniel. If you dig into it, though, there's even more with Virgo (the Virgin), Venus (the mother star), Mercury (the child star), and prophecy given in Revelation by John... If you're interested in this theory, I found a great video on YouTube that goes in to more detail (he goes into a lot of other things too; I encourage listening to the whole series, but I am linking the part specific to the star at the nativity). This theory explains why no one else noticed the star.

Herod and the Massacre of the Innocents

When the wise men get to Jerusalem they tell Herod why they're in town, and Herod is not happy to hear that the true King of Jerusalem has been born. Here I want to insert some context that will be reoccurring theme in the gospels: the Jews thought the Messiah was going to restore Israel to the splendor of Solomon. Essentially, they expected something much closer to what we expect for the second coming. In Herod's mind, this child would grow up and overthrow both him and the Roman government that gave him authority. This is why from birth, Christ was seen as a threat to power.

Herod, being led by Satan, does the same thing Pharaoh did while Israel was awaiting a Savior in Egypt (Exodus 1): he kills all the children. This fulfills a prophecy given by Jeremiah 31:15. During this atrocity, Mary, Joseph, and their newborn baby hide in Egypt, which also fulfills a prophecy (Hosea 11:1). Please note that the family hiding in Egypt follows the pattern started with Abraham of hiding in Egypt when there is trouble in Israel.

Nazarene

Before we end the chapter, we are told that Joseph and his family settle in Nazareth to fulfill a prophecy that the Messiah would be a Nazarene. There are two major things to point out about this revelation.

First, the reference to this prophecy appears to be lost. Many theories have been ascribed to what is being referenced here. Some believe there was a book that has not been added into our canon. Others believe it is a reference to Him being despised (Isaiah 53), because in John 1:46 we learn that the residents of Nazareth are not held in high esteem.[3][4]

Second, Nazarene is not the same as Nazarite. I've heard many people confuse this. Christ was a Nazarene because He was raised in Nazareth (similar to how I would be considered a Carolinian because I was raised in the Carolinas). Christ did not take a Nazarite vow, as evidenced by His consumption of wine (Numbers 6; Luke 7:34-35).

Frankincense, Gold, and Myrrh

The 3 gifts given to Christ are very fitting. Each represents a part of the Messiah's purpose. Frankincense was associated with the priests (Leviticus 2). Gold was associated with kings (). Myrrh was associated with death (Mark 15:23).[5][6][7]

Also, a common misconception is that there were 3 wise men; this assumption comes from the fact that they gave 3 gifts. It could just as easily been ten wise men or two wise men—the Bible does not specify that each man gave one gift, only that there was more than one man and 3 gifts given.

References

1. Larry Sessions. "Meet Regulus, The Lion’s Heart". Earth Sky. May 1, 2020
2. "Solar System Exploration: Jupiter". NASA; visited July 2021
3. "The Messiah would be called a Nazarene". Jews for Jesus; visited July 2021
4. "What prophecy is Matthew 2:23 referring to regarding Jesus being a Nazarene?". GotQuestions.org; visited July 2021
5. Eric Zielinski. "Gold, Frankincense & Myrrh – The Truth About Their Significance". Natural Living Family. June 23, 2020
6. Clint Pumphrey . "What Are Frankincense and Myrrh?". How Stuff Works. October 16, 2018
7. "Why Did the Magi Bring Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh?". Biblical Archaeology Society. June 15, 2021
8. Ree Hughes. "The Life is in the Blood". PSALMS to God. June 23, 2021

Obadiah

Introduction

The book of Obadiah only has one chapter! It's one of the shortest books in the Bible. With such a succint book, you can expect that not much is known about it's author, the prophet Obadiah—he keeps it straight to the point and doesn't spend much time on himself. Some scholars believe he was a contemporary of Jeremiah, while others believe he operated around the reign of Jehoram, and yet others place him as a contemporary of Elisha. The latter camps argue that because Obadiah doesn't mention the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, it was probably written before that destruction took place. The earliest date (Obadiah as a contemporary of Elisha) was proposed because Obadiah seems to reference the act that occurs in 2 Chronicles 28:17. No matter which of these dates is the true period in which Obadiah wrote, we can see that his prophecies were written before they were fulfilled.

Woe to Edom

Unlike most prophetic books of the Old Testament, Obadiah only talks about judgment on one nation: Edom. Edom was the bitter enemy of Israel, dating back to the rivalry between Esau (Edom) and Jacob (Israel). Despite the two brothers seeming to come to an agreement and make peace with each other, these two nations never got along. Edom joined Israel's ememies in attacking the city (2 Chronicles 28:17) and was not helpful when they were fleeing Egypt during the Exodus (Numbers 20:18). For this reason, God issued a judgment on Israel. Obadiah also lists the fact that Edom gloated over the failures of Israel as part of the judgment.

The judgment was that Edom would cease to exist. Obadiah describes the extent of dismantling Edom by contrasting it to robbery by thieves and plunders behave, noting that even they would leave something behind. Edom would become completely desolate and they would be betrayed by their so called allies. Today, there is no nation claiming to be descended from Edom. The last archelogical record explicitly referencing Edom as a kingdom/nation dates to 667bc.[2]

For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. Obadiah 1:15 KJV

Characteristics of Edom

I thought it was interesting that there are a few descriptions of the Edomites that give us a glimpse of their culture. They were said to live in the clefts of the rocks, meaning they lived in the caves. I find this interesting because the other mention of caves in the Bible that come to mind are also negative. It is in a cave that Lot's daughter rape him to produce sons (Genesis 19:30-38) and in Revelation, it is there that the lost go to hide from God's wrath (Revelation 6:15). To this day there is still negativity associated with living in caves via the term "caveman."

Another thing I found interesting was that the Edomites were compared to an eagle. Countries have always had mascots, likely why in visions God uses beasts to represent countries (see Daniel 7, Acts 10, and Revelation 13). The eagle was also associated with the Roman empire. Today, the eagle is associated with many countries accross the globe, including the United Staes.[3]

What Can We Learn From This

For passages like this, I often ask myself what it is saying about my world today. Yes, the primary purpose was to give hope to the Israelites that the Edomites would pay for their behavior, and one could argue that a secondary purpose was for God to prove His ability to reveal the future to His servants. However, there's a reason God preserved this text for us today, long after the name Edom has become a thing of the past.

One of the main condemnations of Edom is that they relished in their brother's pain. We should not mock anyone else's suffering! We should also be willing to help our brothers and sisters when they are in need. We can learn from Edom's mistakes to ensure that we don't behave the same way.

References

1. William MacDonald. Believer's Bible Commentary, pg. 1121. 1995
2. "Edom". Wikipedia; visited January 2021
3. "Eagle (heraldry)". Wikipedia; visited January 2021

Acts 16: Timothy Was Biracial...Sort Of

Timothy

Acts 16 tells us that Timothy was born to a Jewish mother and a Greek father. The Bible doesn't concern it self with "race" because the concept of race that we have today didn't exist; however, we are often told of tribal or national affilliations. These affilitions, like race, came with assumptions and prejudices that have parallels with the racial issues we see today.

Many of the stories I've heard from biracial friends have been about reconciling identities and getting others to accept both parts of their heritage. Although, Timothy's story is not about this specifically, I see a similar pattern. The begining of Acts 16 alludes to the pushback Timothy received (or was expected to receive) from the Jews because he had a Jewish father. The "need" to prove oneself to one side (or both sides) of one's heritage is still felt by people today, unfortunately.

Israel is a patriarchal society, so tribal identity is passed by the father.[1] We see this throughout the Bible and from the formation of Israel. Arguably, it is possible that a non-Jew could convert to Judaism, marry a Jewish woman and their children would still be considered Jewish, but that does not seem to be the case for Timothy.

We know that Timothy's father didn't convert or adopt Jewish customs because Timothy is an adult and uncircumcised. This is where we see the struggle in his lineage come to fruition. Despite having just concluded that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised, Paul circumcises Timothy. We're going to talk about this act separately, but for now I want to talk about how it relates to Timothy's identity

Timothy's Struggle

The Jews would not accept Timothy as a Greek but they couldn't accept him as a Jew either. While there isn't anything that suggests he should deny his Greek father, there is a strong suggestion that he has to fully embrace his maternal roots to be part of that world. In some cases it may be possible to fully embrace two difference cultrues, but in many cases today there is contention, especially concerning nationality. I've heard many immigrants expressing strife with reconciling their "American-ness" with their heritage. I believe Timothy could relate.

What Can We Learn From Timothy?

Unfortunately, because the purpose of Timothy's story is not to inform us on the dynamics of nativigating multicultural identities, there is no real statement on how to handle such a thing, only interpretations. The act of Timothy's circumcision seems to be an act of him choosing his Jewish identity over his Greek identity, but we have to remember that this was really a statement about worship. Race, as we define it today, is not about religion or values, but in Timothy's case, it was about identifying who he worshipped. Greeks worshiped pagan gods and goddess but Jews worshipped YHWH, who had required all male children descended from Abraham be circumcised.

Notice, we get no information on how Timothy spoke. It is likely that he spoke both Hebrew and Greek, but did he speek like a Greek or like a Hebrew? In our society people judge "outsiders" based on dialects and accents, taste in entertainment, and many other trivial matters. You may be told you don't embody a particular culture for many insignificant reasons. These are not things we should trouble ourselves with; I believe God would have you to be confident in being yourself. What I took away from Timothy's identity struggle is that our identity in Christ should trump all things, as cliché as that might sound. Our actions should testify of our faith and that's all that really matters.

Why Did Paul Circumcise Timothy?

Now, let's come back to this act of circumcision. The last chapter we read (Acts 15) was literally an agruement about circumcision. During the arguement Paul advocated that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised, and the council eventually agreed. So why is it that all of a sudden Paul is circumcising Timothy? I don't know the exact answer but I do have a few thoughts (and questions).

Did Circumcision Stop Being a Requirement for Jewish Men?

Christ Himself says He didn't come to change the law, which makes me wonder about the old covenant and the new covenant... There are multiple covenants in the Bible: the rainbow (Genesis 9:12-14), circumcision (Genesis 17:10), the laws of Israel (Exodus 24:7-8), Christ's resurrection (Hebrews 8:8), etc. The covenant God made with Abraham did not nullify the covenant God made with Noah. So why do should the covenant God made through Christ nullify the covenant He made with Abraham? In most of the discussions about circumcision, the New Testament is addressing whether or not Gentiles need to be circumcised. There's never a debate about the Jews. Customarily the Jews would have already been circumcised so there was no need for this discussion in reference to adults, but we also don't see parents opting to forego circumcision.

Unlike the average Gentile, Timothy had Israelite blood, thanks to his mother. The covenant of circumcision applied to Abraham and his descendants (including Ishmael), which technically still could be applied to Timothy. Conversely, God had never required the Gentiles to be circumcised physically, so circumcision of the heart was the only thing they needed to worry about. Perhaps those born Jewish by blood were still bound by the covenant with Abraham (which was not the same as the covenant made with Moses)?

It Was Not a Salvation Issue

One thing is certain, in Acts 16, Paul does not make Timothy's circumcision about salvation. It is evident that this has to do with his identity as both Jewish and Greek. In previous discussions, the argument was that Gentiles could not be saved if they were not circumcised, which Paul rejects. In Acts 16, Paul isn't the least concerned with Timothy's salvation; the issue is how the Jews will receive him. Paul circumcising Timothy in this case is like wearing a cardigan to church—I'm not saved because I covered my arms and shoulders, but because some people have a problem with seeing skin,[2] it is easier to focus their attention on the message if I eliminate the distraction.

The Israelites were very legalistic and had been taught that uncricumcision was unclean, but more importantly, a Jew who was not circumcised was an anathema to them. The knowledge that he was uncircumcised would have distracted them from his message. (Yes, this is a lot more painful than simply putting on a jacket and yes, to the modern mind it is befuddling that the Jewish men and women would be so caught up on the state of someone's private body parts—that is why it is important to focus our mind on the time period so that we can understand the context.)

Increasing in Number

Acts 16:5 says the church increased in number daily. Does your church get new members weekly? Can you imagine new people joining your church daily? To have new members daily, you have to spread the Word daily!

Forbidden to Preach in Asia

Can you imagine the Holy Spirit telling you not to preach somewhere or not to tell someone about God? That's counterintuitive. However, in Acts 16:6-10, the Holy Spirit blocks the apostles from preaching in certain places. Perhaps it wasn't the right time, or maybe they just weren't the right people. Nonetheless, God directed them to where they were supposed to preach. Many Christians today are discribed as pushy—trying to force God on people. Yet, there are multiple passages where we see God tell His people to move on. The Holy Spirit is to direct us when to speak and when to be silent.

Now when they had gone through Phrygia and the region of Galatia, they were forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in Asia. Acts 16:6

Lydia

Acts 16:11-15 tells us of the conversion of a woman named Lydia. She was from Thyatira (one of the 7 churches of Asia Minor mentioned in Revelation). Outside of being a refuge for Paul and Silas after they escape jail, the importance of Lydia is not really given. One thing I did notice is that she was already a believer in God; it seems that this is a conversion from Judaism to Christianity. Also, her entire household is converted, but neither her husband nor her father is never mentioned or named. This implies that she took the most active role in the conversion and subsequent interactions.

Imprisioned

One of the more interesting things I found in the chapter is the events which led to Paul and Silas being thrown in jail. A woman who was possessed by "a spirit of divination" begins following them around. We know that this is a demonic spirit because Paul and Silas cast out the demon, however, the woman is both aware that they have information about salvation and announcing it. When we think of possession and demonic spirits, usually we think of people trying to hinder God's Kingdom. We would expect this person to be getting in the way their preaching or harassing those who stop to listen. There is no mentioning of this type of behavior though.

I find this interesting for a few reasons. I see it as an example of how to treat "lost" people. One might argue that the woman is lost because she is participating in soothsaying and possessed by an ungodly spirit, however she seems to be reaching out in spite of her demons. In response, Paul does not scold her or make her feel like an outsider, but instead rids her of the demon. When people come to us seeking Christ, it is very possible that they have a demon or multiple demons that are being exploited by others. It is important for us to help them instead of judging.

I have two major questions about the situation, however. First, was the woman seeking help or was she causing a distraction? There are many who claim truths (usually mixed with partial truths and lies) that appear godly to the spiritually untrained eye. These people then lure away God's people under the pretense that are of God. I have met many who buzz around the Church, proclaiming The Most High as king of the universe, but are actually there to stir dissention. Second, why did Paul wait so long to cast out the spirit?

Regardless, once the woman is free of the spirit, she is no longer of value to the men exploiting her. In anger, they have Paul and Silas arrested. While in prison they continue to worship God, and just as He did for Peter, God delivers them from prison. Its interesting that despite being set free, they do not try to escape. As a result of this, they end up saving the life of the guard and converting him. How many times are we so concerned for ourselves that we flee a situation without concern for those around us? Only a connection to the Holy Spirit would convince you to stay in jail when you have been given a way to escape—most of us would have made a bee-line for freedom!

One final point on this section concerns the baptism of the guard. He was baptized the very hour he chose to be saved. Many churches make their members go through training and classes before allowing their baptism, but there is plenty of evidence in the Bible that people were baptised as soon as they confessed, not later.

What is Started in Public is Resolved in Public

Those who put Paul and Silas in jail agreed to let them go, but wanted them to leave in secret. Paul is angered by this and refuses to do so. He argues that they were publically mistreated so they should be officially pardoned. This is still an issue today. The media is quick to publish sensational news, but rarely do they print as large of an article to pardon someone wrongfully accused.

References & Footnotes

1. Jews today claim lineage through their mothers but that is not Biblical. If lineage was passed through the mother, the entire lineage falls apart as Jacob, the father of Israel is the one descended from Abraham and at least two of his sons (Joseph and Judah) marry Hamitic women. Most Jews today descend from Judah (some may be the tribe of Benjamin or Levi). Within the lineage of David are 3 non-Israelite women: Tamar (the Canaanite who bore Judah children), Rahab (the Canaanite who bore Boaz), and Ruth (the Moabite who married Boaz). If identity was passed through the mother, David would have been an illegitimate king.
2. I really don't understand this, but I have encountered several people (always men) who lose their minds over seeing a shoulder. That conversation however, is probably better suited for a post on misogny and modesty.

Revelation 1: John Receives a Vision

Many attribute the book of Revelation to John, son of Zebedee and brother of James; the text merely refers to John with no other indentifying factors. His contemporaries would have known exactly which John was exiled to Patmos, and thus it would be unnecessary to provide additional information. The fact that the early church kept his letter and took it seriously proves that whichever John wrote the message, he was respected among believers.

Patmos

The isle of Patmos is famous becasue of John—I don't think I've ever heard it referenced for any other reason. The isle is located on the Aegean Sea, near Greece. Romans exiled people to the isle because it is barren, with rocky terrain[4]—the opposite of the island get away you think of for vacation. It is here that John receives profound, and often confusing, vision of the end.

John Receives a Vision

Revelation is a vision. When God gives visions (or dreams) to people He speaks to them in symbolic language. Seeing cow in the vision doesn't mean a literal cow will appear. Examples of this can be seen with Joseph (Genesis 41), Daniel (Daniel 7), and Peter (Acts 10-11). As such, many of the images given to John are symbolic. To understand these symbols, we must look for references within the Word that define the symbols for us. The majority of Revelation's symbols are defined in the book of Daniel or as they're given, but occasionally we must look in other books of the Bible as well.

Image of the Messiah

The following description is given of the Messiah:

¹³and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. ¹⁴His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; ¹⁵His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; ¹⁶He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.Revelation 1:13-16 NKJV

Clothing

The first thing John takes note of is the Messiah's attire: a garment to the feet that is girded at the chest. Usually, garments are held up (or girded) at the waist. Another time we see someone wearing a breastplate to gird their garments is in Exodus 28:15-29. The breastplate described was worn by the High Priest of Israel and contained the names of each tribe engraved in the stones that decorated the garment. Since Christ is the new High Priest (Hebrews 4:14-16), it makes sense that He would appear to John, who was very familiar with the garments of the High Priest, wearing such an attire. For the Israelites, the reference of this attire would have been obvious. Elsewhere in Revelation, we will see references to white garments, but John doesn't give any more detail about Christ's garments here. Since He is dressed as the High Priest, it is possible that His clothes were blue and appeared as described in Exodus 28:31-36.

Head and Hair

Many of us have taken the comparison of Christ's hair to wool to be literal, asserting that Christ had curly hair (I have made this statement myself). However, it appears that the reference being made is actually to the color of his hair. Of course in Daniel 7:9, we see the same reference and in the original language (Aramaic) the verse reads closer to "hair like pure wool."[1] As outlined in the 2nd commandment, we aren't supposed to get caught up on what God or Christ look like, which is probably why He made it hard to draw any hard-line conclusions about his appearance from the text. In this particular verse, the point being made is about attributes, not His physical appearance. The significance of white hair is the inference of wisdom (Leviticus 19:32; Proverbs 16:31).

When I was a child, I defined "old" as anyone with gray hair. If I had seen a 40 year old with all gray hair, that was the same to me as a 70 year old with gray hair. Without having ever read the Biblical passages given above, I associated gray (or white) hair with the maturity and wisdom that comes with age. The Messiah presented Himself this way to John as a reminder that He is eternal and has eternal wisdom.

Eyes

What does it mean for Christ's eyes to be like fire? When I hear about fire, especially in the context of Revelation, I automatically think of judgement, but fire is significant for many reasons. The Bible associates fire with God's judgement (e.g., Genesis 19:24) and God's presence (e.g., Exodus 3:2). There are also many verses that speak of God seeing or searching the "inward" parts of man,[3] which is a form of judgment as He is only concern with our character. This fire represents the all seeing, all knowing presence of God—the only One Who has authority to judge the world.

³³No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light. ³⁴The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.Luke 11:33-36 KJV

Feet

To this day, Middle Eastern culture regards the foot as unclean or undesirable. This is why it was so shocking that Christ would wash the disciples feet and why it was considered an act of humility. In more recent times, you may remember when past president, George W. Bush visited Iraq and a journalist threw shoes at him. Culturally, this was a profound statement of disrespect from the Iraqi journalist responsible for the act.[2] Psalms 108:9 also references "casting a shoe" in a manner that tells us it is not good.

The feet however, are the foundation of your body—anatomically speaking. If it weren't for you feet your could not stand up, jump, run, walk, or even dance. The feet could be seen as your root.

The fact that Christ's feet are described as brass or bronze lends to both of these points. John explicitly says it was as though these feet had been in a furnace. Daniel 3 gives us a basis for why Christ's feet might look as though they'd been in a furnace. Just as He walked with Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (Babylonian names: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) in the fiery furnace, He came to earth as a man and experienced all the trials and tribulations of man. Christ experienced shame, just as we have, and it is through this shared experience that He is able to build a relationship with us. This relationship is our foundation in His Kingdom.

Voice

When I think of the voice of God, I think of thunder. If you give me time, I might get to the still small voice that Elijah heard (1 Kings 19:12). The description of His voices as many waters is something I had to think about and research. It is a reference to Ezekiel 43:2, where God's voice is also described as the sound of many waters. Interestingly, there are many places in the Bible in which "waters" is associated with a nation or army. In fact, this correlation is explicitly stated in Revelation 17:15. I wonder if the fact that the Messiah's voice sounds as many waters, symbolizes His ability to unify people from all over the world into His Kingdom?

Right Hand

In His right hand (the hand of favor) are 7 stars. These stars are defined later in the chapter as being the angels of the seven churches (which come up in Revelation 2-3). These could be guardian angels, or simply human messengers. We have to remember that the term angel simply means messenger. Thus, it is hard to identify these particular angels as being heavenly or earthly. Either way, they are connected to the message John is about to receive for each each church.

Out of His Mouth

A double-edged sword coming out of one's mouth sounds both terrifying and painful. The sword is defined in Hebrews 4:12 as the Word of God. The Messiah speaks truth, and only truth. We all know the phrase "the truth hurts," and in God's case, the truth can hurt both the judge and the judged. God does not want us to choose death and it pains Him to have to execute that judgement. Obviously for those who have chosen death, the judgement will hurt them. However, for those who stand on the truth of God's Word, there needn't be any fear of this sword.

Countenance

Countenance usually references your face or expression. So to have a face or expression like the sun implies brightness to me. We know that God is light, and we also know that after Moses "saw" God, he glowed (Exodus 34:29-35). Many beleive that before the fall, mankind had a similar glow about them.

Lampstands

Christ identifies the 7 lampstands as the 7 churches. The 7 churches of Asia minor (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardia, Philidelphia, and Laodicea) are identified in Revelation 2-3. Each of these churhces existed in real life, but the struggles each church faced can be more broadly applied in a Spiritual sense. It is unclear whether the reference in Revelation 1 refers to the literal 7 churches of Asia minor, or if it references the spiritual 7 churches.

Alpha and Omega

Most of us know Alpha and Omega mean beginning and end. Alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet (the original language of the book of Revelation) and Omega is the last letter. An Amazing Facts sermon on this chapter actually gave me a whole new meaning to Alpha and Omega.[5] Alpha and Omega represent letters, just like A and Z. These letters and all the letters in between are used to create words which express and represent our thoughts. Christ is the Word of God (John 1:14), the thoughts of God revealed.

Other Relevant Posts

Word Study: Apocalypse

References

1. Daniel 7:9 Interlinear Bible". Blue Letter Bible; visited July 5, 2020
2. Antonia Noori Farzan. "10 years ago, an Iraqi journalist threw his shoes at George W. Bush and instantly became a cult figure". The Washington Post. December 14, 2018
3. "The Inward Being". Knowing Jesus; visited May 16, 2020
4. "Patmos". Encyclopædia Britannica. August 9, 2018
5. Ree Hughes. "Word Study: Apocalypse". PSALMS to God. May 2, 2020

Acts 15: Disagreements in the Church

Let's agree to disagree is easy when it comes to trivial matters, less easy when it comes to matter of the heart/morality, and even less easy when it comes to salvation. Today, there are over 30,000 Christian denominations,[4] mainly due to doctrinal disagreements. This issue existed all the way back to the very beginning of the Church. This chapter gives us two examples of disagreements within the church—one of which doesn't seem to get resolved.

Circumcision & the Law

After the church agreed to allow Gentile converts, they quickly ran into the problem of what was required to be a true convert. Descendents of Abraham were required to be circumcised. Israelites by birth were circumcised on the 8th day, but converts were circumcised at conversion. We see in Genesis 34 that this process in adult males rendered them incapcitated. Can you imagine hearing the gospel, believing it, and then someone telling you to be saved you have to get circumcised? The Pharisees—presumably those who had converted to Christianity—were suggesting exactly that. Many of the early Church leaders disagreed with this stance, including Paul, Barnabas, Peter, and James.[1] Which poses a theological question: are you still saved if you don't circumcise yourself.

To resolve the matter, the leaders met to form a consensus. Peter argues that when God gave the Gentiles the Holy Spirit, He purified their hearts through faith. Peter also asserts that the Pharisees were asking the Gentiles to do something they couldn't even do (keep the law of Moses). After Peter's argument, Paul and Barnabas support his points by revealing the miracles God has worked for the Gentiles, proving His presence is there without circumcision. James concludes the discussion by outlining 4 things they should require of the new converts: abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, sexually immorality, meat from strangled animales, and blood.

So the Law is Gone?

There are two (and a half) interpretations of the council's decision. Some believe that this completely abolishes the laws of the Old Testament, leaving only the four requirements outlined by the council. More commonly, people divide the laws of Moses[2] and claim only a subsection of the laws were abolished. The remaining state that this isn't about abolishing laws but emphasizing what was important for salvation, particularly to the Gentiles.

It's one of the more confusing matters. Remember scripture has to work in harmony, and it needs context, so lets work through some of that.

After this council, when Paul writes to the Church in Corinth,[3] he says this:

⁹Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, ¹⁰Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. ¹¹And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 KJV

Paul's statement lists traits that we are not to revel in. We'll save the specifics of the verse for when we talk about Corinthians but the basic concept is that these traits are seen as unrighteous. Many of them fit within the four things spoken against by the council, but some of them (thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners, etc.) do not. Theft and coveting are covered by the 10 Commandments, for those who argue the 10 Commandments was not part of the Law of Moses but is the Law of God. However, guidlines about drunkenness and extortion are given in other parts of the law, parts that can't be distinguished from the Law of Moses.

In Acts 15:21, we can find clarity. James argues that each of the cities has someone who preaches the law of Moses (re: they have access to that information). There was a stark difference between the Gentile converts and the Jewish converts: one was converting religions and learning a new diety, while the other was simply relearning how to interpret old scriptures. The Jews who joined the Church were already well versed in the law and circumcised, there wasn't much that needed to change as they assimilated into the body. Gentiles, however, still needed to learn the laws. Those who were pro-circumcision, didn't want to include the Gentiles in the synagouge or the church without them being both circumcised and fully aware of the law. The opposing side proved that circumcision wasn't nessecary as God was already showing His Spirit to the uncircumcised Gentiles. Learning the law is something the Holy Spirit could handle once they surrendered their life to God. When the Holy Spirit filled them, they could go listen to the law read in thier respective city and gain that knowledge. However, it was not neceassary for them to keep that law in order for the Holy Spirit to enter their life, this is why we see Peter and Paul arguing that the Gentiles have felt the Spirit even though they are uncircumcised.

The Importance of these 4 Things

The Law of Moses references the entire Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy), so out of all those laws, why did they settle on these four? These four laws focus on what this particular group would have been struggling with. The ways of Roman/Greek pagan deities were in direct contrast to the God's way. Abstaining from these behaviors took the Gentiles out of their pagan lifestyle (and comfort zone), opening the door for the new way of life. Pagan rituals included sacrifices, consuming blood, and sex.[5] By putting these behaviors behind them, they were also announcing their allegience to God and welcoming Him as the authority in their life. Remember, the Jews already worshiped YHWH, they were just accepting Christ as the Messiah. In contrast, the Gentiles were learning and accepting a whole new lifestyle. They needed to cut the cords with their pagan gods to truly receive to the Holy Spirit.

Please note an important fact here. The Jews were used to salvation being dependent on an action on their part (circumcision, sacrifice, righteous behavior, etc.), but Christ gave us grace. In shutitng down the idea that circumcision was necessary, the apostles killed the idea that you had to earn salvation. Salvation was given without any of this. However, the behavior of a saved person is should align with the Holy Spirit. It won't be perfect, but if the Holy Spirit is leading, things considered ungodly will automatically be lessened and eventually removed from your life. This means all the things God despises, eventually you sould too, and He doesn't change.

Paul vs. Barnabas

When I think of disputes between individuals, I think of reconciliation, and when I think of reconciliation, I think of being on one accord. Many a Christian would have you to believe that "loving from a distance" is not Biblical, but when you look at Paul and Barnabas' disagreement at the end of Acts 15, you might not agree.

Paul and Barnabas agree that they should revisit the churches they have planted among the Gentiles (see Acts 13-14), and begin making plans to for their second journey. However, during this planning phase, they disagree about who should join them. Barnabas wants to bring John Mark, whom Paul considers a deserter. The disagreement between the two is so great that Paul and Barnabas split up. Barnabas takes John Mark and embarks on his on journey, while Paul travels with Silas.

There's a lot to pick apart here, from how they handle the disagreement to the implications of the disagreement.

Forgive and Forget?

When we talked about forgiveness at a Bible Study, we got hung up on the concept of forgive and forget. Forgiving is hard in itself, but we questioned whether we should truely forget some actions. For instance, you may forgive a pedophile but I don't think anyone would be comfortable with them leading the children's ministry. Similarly you may forgive a thief, but you probably wouldn't be so quick to nominate them for treasurer. We discussed these types of scenarios at length, trying to determine what truly constituted full forgiveness and what was the correct way to proceed—can a recovering thief never be the treasurer?

Paul seems to agree with us that there has to be some sort of process to get from point A to point B, because he is adamant that John Mark should not go with them. John Mark's crime appears to be abandonning them on a previous trip. No only does Paul not back down to suggest John Mark has changed, grew, or should otherwise be given a second chance, but the Church seems to support Paul's decision (Acts 15:40).

Agree to Disagree

Paul and Barnabas end their dispute by agreeing to disagree. Paul didn't cave to Barnabas' pressure and Barnabas didn't gave to Paul's. They both stood firm in what they believed in—a valuable lesson to those who've been made to feel that they have to cave in to keep the peace. What's really important about their decision to go separate ways is that it doesn't hurt their relationship. In 1 Corinthians 9:6, which takes place at a later time, Paul refers to Barnabas without malice. We also see in Colossians 4:10 and 2 Timothy 4:11, Paul seems to have reconciled with Mark as well. These men did not let their pride or ego get in the way of furthering God's mission. In fact, the disagreement worked for the glory of God in that separately, they covered more territory!

References

1. We actually see Paul get into the same disagreement with Peter in Galatians 2 (which assumably predates this council).
2. Some people divide the Torah into the 10 Commandments (which they call the law of God) and everything else (which they call the law of Moses). Others divide it into ceremonial vs. moral laws—and even within that what is categorized as what can be different.
3. There are plenty of references online that have dates for the when events happen in the Bible, but I recommend having a Chronological Bible in your library. The one I have not only orders the books of the Bible based on timeline, but it interleaves passages from different books according to the timeline. For example, the instead of giving you the gospels as separate books, you read the account of events from each author back to back. A word of caution, some dates are disputed so you should still research the information presented to you for yourself.
4. "Denominations". Christianity Today; visited June 30, 2020
5. Geoffrey Stone. "‘Sex and the Constitution’: The ancient Greeks". The Washington Post. March 21, 2017

Acts 13-14: The First Missionary Journey of Paul

Acts 13-14 discusses the leadership of the church in Antioch, and the first journey taken by Paul and Barnabas to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. The podcast entiled "Church Leadership" is on these chapters.

Leaders in the Church of Antioch

Barnabas

Of the leaders mentioned, Barnabas and Paul are the most discussed throughout the chapters. Barnabas is first mentioned in Acts 4:36. Here we learn that he was a Levite from Cyprus who was actually named Joses (or Joseph). One of the early converts to Christianity, he was likely the "senior leader" in Antioch. Interestingly, when Paul experiences his conversion, it is Barnabas that believes him (Acts 9:27).

Simeon, called Niger

Not much is known about Simeon, called Niger, but much is supposed. The word Niger is Latin for "black," which leads some to speculate that Simeon was a black man.[1][2] There are actually a lot of possibilities here and because I've seen such confusion in the comments about Simeon, I want to discuss them.

We have to remember not to read into the Bible what we want. The truth is, black does not have to refer to his skin color. In fact, the concept of calling people "black people" didn't start until much later than that. Interestingly the country Niger, is actually named for a phrase in a different language which references a river&mash;it is not called Niger in reference to the skin color of the people living there.[3] Perhaps Simeon was a blacksmith and often covered in soot. It is also possible that Simeon always wore black robes or that it was his surname (think about many of the people with the last name Black in the US today). The Bible doesn't tell us precisely why he was called black so we cannot be certain.

Now suppose he was called black because of his dark skin. One person agrues that calling him "black" would actually mean this is a unique feature. This is their counterpoint to the idea of the Israelites being black.[2] This a fallacy however. Blackness, in terms of a race, comes in many shades. I have heard black people point out the "extreme" darkness of another black person's skin. Though much of this comes from the brainwashing of colonialism and white supremacy, which would not have existed at the time of Simeon, it remains possible that Simeon was simply darker than those around him and does not rule out the idea that the Israelites were brown skinned people.

In short, we can't draw specific conclusions from Simeon's nickname (or surname).

Lucius of Cyrene

Lucius was from Cyrene, a city in modern day Libya (North Africa). There was a heavy Jewish and Christian influence in Africa, we've already seen this with the man Philip baptizes from Ethiopia (Acts 8). Despite claims that Christianity first spread in Europe, we see that there were Christians in Africa from the very beginning of the Church. It is thought tha Lucius is one of the men of Cyrene spoken of from the beginning of Acts and a Jew.[4] Just as the Jews were known to travel to Egypt, they traveled into other parts of Africa, such as Lybia, and made their home there.

Manaen

It is interesting that the discription attached to Manaen is that he was associated with Herod the tetrarch[5]. This is the only information given about him. Because of the timing, it is assumed that Manaen was a Jew who was raised alongside Herod.[6]

Saul

Saul, later called Paul, is listed last among the leaders of the church. At this time, Paul was still an infant in his career and would have been the "rookie" of the group.

Paul & Barnabas sent out to Preach

Paul and Barnabas are sent to spread the Word. It is important to notice that after converting, the goal was to teach others. People like Paul and Barnabas grew from baby Christians to leaders in their own right. The mission was to spread the Word to all who would receive it. That can't be accomplished by only talking to those who already agree with you.

Chapters 13 and 14 outline the journey Paul and Barnabas take to spread the gospel throughout the kingdom of Rome. If you compare their route to a modern map, the journey covered 3 countries: Syria, Cyrpus, and Turkey. Below is a list of locations they visited on their journey:

• Antioch (Syria)
• Seleucia (Syria)
• Salamis (Cyprus)
• Paphos (Cyrpus)
• Perga (Pamphylia)
• Antioch (Pisidia)
• Iconium (Phyrgia)
• Lystra (Lycaonia)
• Derbe (Lycaonia)
• Lystra (Lycaonia)
• Iconium (Phyrgia)
• Antioch (Pisidia)
• Perga (Pamphylia)
• Attalia (modern Antalya, Turkey)
• Antioch (Syria)

Paul and Barnabas' journey to preach to the Gentiles notcibily does not include the tribes of people they usually were in contact with. They could have went East into what is modern Jordan or Iraq, or South, into modern Eygpt and Saudia Arabia. In these lands they would have spoken to the Moabites, Ishmaelites, Egyptians, etc. Since the beginning of my deeper studies into the Word, I have begun to challenge the notion that "Gentile" refers to everyone who is not an Israelite. In Genesis 10:1-5, it describes the descendants of Japheth and refers to them as the Gentiles. The descendants of Ham and Shem are never refered to as Gentiles, and as we look at the journey taken by Paul and Barabas, we see that they only visited the lands of Japheth to preach to the Gentiles.

References

1. "Strongs G3526. Νίγερ. Blue Letter Bible; visited June 21, 2020
2. LJ Thriepland. "Simeon was called Niger, does that prove the Israelites were black?". Follow in Truth. August 25, 2018
3. Finn Fuglestad and Diouldé Laya. "Niger". Encyclopædia Britannica. November 8, 2019
4. "Lucius". Bible Hub; visited June 21, 2020
5. "Herod Antipas". Encyclopædia Britannica. April 3, 2020
6. "Manaen". Bible Study Tools; visited June 21, 2020
7. Underground Network. "Iconium, Lystra, Derbe & Back". Medium. August 31, 2015

Acts 12: Herod, Peter, and Rhoda

Easter Controversy

If you read Acts 12:4 in the KJV, it says Easter—pretty much every other translation says Passover. The original Greek word is πάσχα, which means Passover.[2] Some use the KJV to "validate" Easter as a holiday, but even if you could justify the translation, it would not justify the holiday. Verses 1-3 set up the fact that Herod despised the Christians. Christianity was forbidden. Why would the king celebrate/honor a Christian holiday? Would it not have been even more of a show of force to desecrate the holiday?

If you take the KJV's approaach and argue that the translation should be Easter, the only conclusion we can make is that Easter is a Roman holiday. It makes much more sense for Herod to put off killing an "enemy of the state" to celebrate his own holidy that to appease the people he believes are criminals.

In contrast to the Christians, however, Judaism was tolerated in Rome. The Roman govenors waslked a tedious line between exerting Rome's authority and allowing the Jews some autonomy to avoid revolt. The most likely scenario is that Herod thought killing Peter would make the Roman-Jewish alliance stronger, therefore he postponed the execution in honor of Passover.

Herod: Pride

Acts 12 reveals a plot by King Herod (Herod Agrippa I[1]) to kill Christians, specifically Peter. The text doesn't say much about Herod, but it clearly paints him as cruel and prideful. In the first couple of verses we see that he enjoyed harassing Christians—Herod kills James before he sets his sights on Peter. In the final verses of the chapter, we see him killed by God is response to his pridefulness. His existance bookends the chapter. In both sequences he is disobedient to God, but in the latter there are dire consequences. His master plan is interrupted by God, and Peter is saved from the prison. Despite following the Jewish practices, Herod does not see this as an act of God. He instead blames his guards and has them put to death in Peter's place. Reeling from this failure, Herod continues to boast of his own glory. As the kings of other nations claim to view him as a god, Herod does not correct them. This angers God who strikes him dead.

Just as the chapter begins and ends with Herod, Herod's story begins and ends with pride. Proverbs 16:18 says that pride goes before a fall; we see this in practice with Herod. When we behave in a prideful manner, we carve out a difficult path. If we never turn around and repent, we too will end up like Herod.

Peter: Morality

Peter is in jail waiting to die, and yet he is found sound asleep. Its amazing that he was able to sleep in such a situation. The only way you can sleep in times like that is if you have faith and confidence in your actions. Peter did exactly what God called him to do. If he were to die at the hands of Herod, he knew he we would be greeted eagerly by our Heavenly Father. When we stay in line with God's morals—regardless of how they line up with what the world says is right/wrong—we can be at peace in any situation.

Rhoda: Hope

It's rare that women get named in the Bible, and Rhoda is one of the few who are afforded a name. Rhoda means Rose in Greek. She was likely a servant in the house, explaining why she answered the door, but she had to be involved in the Church to be shocked to see Peter. After Peter was arrested, the church prayed for Peter constantly, yet they still didn't believe it when he showed up. How often do we behave the same way?

References

1. "Herod Agrippa I". Encyclopædia Brittanica; visited June 15, 2020
2. "Strong's G3957. πάσχα". Blue Letter Bible; visited June 15, 2020

Acts 9: From Saul to Paul

Possibly the biggest conversion documented in the Bible is that of Saul of Tarsus. Saul was a vehement persecutor of Christians—he even took part in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 6-7). He would go on to write almost half of the New Testament. Now that's a testimony! Throughout this post, I'm going to refer to him as Paul since that's the name we most commonly use. Let's jump into some key points of his conversion...

What Made Paul Change?

The church I'm a member of is currently investing in discipleship—from small groups to outreach, we're hearing a lot about horizontal relationships. However the conversion of Paul is not about a horizontal relationship. When Christ appears to Paul, he is with his fellow "anti-Christians." He is not moved by Stephen's speech or seeing the perseverance of the disciples. It is Christ Himself who changes Paul's heart. Yes, followers of Christ aid Paul in his transformation, but that first step comes from Christ. The other conversion accounts support this pattern as well, but with Paul I find it much easier to see.

A lot of times we forget this, but it actually isn't our job to convert people. Our job is to help people find answers and grow after the Spirit converts them. When people aren't ready and we push faith on them, it only turns them away. This pattern is evident with the Ethiopian man (Acts 8), Cornelius (Acts 10), and Paul (Acts 9). Each of these men were called by God independently of the disciples. It is only after they accept that call that God sends a disciple to nurture their growth.

Fear of Change

Paul represents an extreme case. He wasn't just someone who made disparaging remarks about Christ's followers, he was actively participating in their deaths. Can you imagine hearing that the person who is responsible for your loved ones' death has turned over a new leaf and is joining you? That's a hard pill to swallow, and as expected, the disciples were not convinced.

The Right to Change

Despite the fact that we don't experience this type of persecution in the modern US, it's oddly relatable. What we do live in, is the era of social media and the permanent record of all our stupidity. Do you remember in school when teacher's threatened to put something on your "permanent record"? I don't know if anyone actually looks at those, but you best believe that Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, etc. have a permanent record of everything you've ever posted. Idiotic babbling, uniformed opinions, drunk posts, idle musings, conspiracy theories, etc. There's also that person bored enough to go back through your life to find the post from 15 years ago where you said/did something you should not have. How many celebrities and political candidates have gotten in front of a camera to release a statement about social media misconduct? A better question is how often do we actually believe them?

When I think about who I was my freshman year of college—the year I created my Facebook account—and who I am now, there are definitely major differences. Lucky for me I've always been a bit reluctant to share my life on social media, but I can easily see how things I thought at 18 could haunt me at 32. And yet, I have a right to change—to grow.

The Church is one of the most unforgiving places when it comes to change. I don't know how many times I've seen or heard about a "Christian" rudely dwelling on a person's past. When people turn away from the world, we should be welcoming them with open arms and making that transition easier. Yet often, they are met with reaction and skepticism.

Skepticism Isn't Always Bad

There are two kinds of apologetic people: those who are actually remorseful and those who got caught. Some people genuinely make mistakes—the girl who got pregnant/the guy who got a girl pregnant outside of marriage, the person who cheated on their spouse once, the person who got desperate once and stole some money, the recovering alcoholic, etc. While other people boldly continue in their sinful trajectory. The latter are the people we rightfully guard against, but in doing so, many times we lump in the former. Yet these are the people with the most compelling stories and the people who are often most able to reach the lost.

We have to approach things with skepticism to avoid allowing false doctrine and complacency in the Church, but how do we know what to shut out and what to accept? How do we recognize a genuine transformation? The Holy Spirit

Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit knows who He's converted. After Paul is converted, the Spirit tells Ananias to go to Paul. Notice that it's not a council of men voting on whether Paul is or isn't a true believer, though it does take a while for them to be convinced. In every case, God places a disciple in position to help His newly converted child. That disciple knows the person is the real deal because the Spirit has revealed it! We should never be relying on ourselves to determine who has changed and who hasn't.

Signs of Change

I don't think everyone changes at the same rate, which means I also don't think everyone's transformation will look the same (a major reason why we should be rely on the Holy Spirit to do the discerning). However, what I do know is that a genuine change will be led by the Holy Spirit and therefore will show a person coming closer to the Holy Spirit. I would expect to see the person seeking answers and studying the Word, leaving behind worldly behaviors, adopting behaviors that reflect our Father, growing the Fruit of the Spirit, and an admission of guilt.

Ananias

Ananias is the brave disciple who goes to Paul right after his conversion. It is Ananias who heals Paul, returning his sight.

Who Was Ananias?

The first point I have to make about Ananias is that he isn't the Ananias from earlier in Acts who ended up dead. Apparently Ananias was a popular name in during this time.

The Name of Ananias

Ananias is actually the Greek variant of the Hebrew Hananiah. In the Old Testament, there is a person named Hananiah featured in the book of Daniel. You may know him better as Shadrach (Daniel 1:7). This Hananiah was strong and stood for God during a time of captivity and turmoil, so it isn't shocking that it would become a popular name. The name actually means "YHWH has been gracious."[1]

The Faith of Ananias

Let's be honest. If the Holy Spirit came to me and told me He wanted me to go to the house of a known killer, I don't know what I would do. I know my immediate answer would not be "Yes Lord." Ananias was just as scared as we know we would have been. The book of Acts doesn't paint a holier-than-thou image of him rushing to Paul without question. Like us, he is taken aback and unsure of the command he is given. The important thing is that he moves past his own reasoning to do what the Holy Spirit requests.

Imagine, if no disciple was ever willing to go to Paul? We know that God's plan was always going to be fulfilled, but someone had to go to him. The Church had to accept Paul for him to be able to spread the gospel. The first step in that process was Ananias surrendering to the Holy Spirit.

The Power of Ananias

How many people do you think actually know who Ananias is? Despite playing a crucial role in Paul's entry to the Church, few people would name him if tasked with jotting a list of people from the New Testament. Yet, he was able to remove the scales from Paul's eyes. What does it say about us if a little known disciple who is never spoken of again can restore vision, but our church doesn't have any healers in it? Where is the Holy Spirit in our Church? Where is our faith?

Summary

• Paul's conversion was motivated by the Spirit
• You cannot and should not force the Word on a person in attempt to convert them
• The Holy Spirit is the only one who can assess wether a person is truly changed or not
• It takes courage and faith to follow the Holy Spirit's instruction instead of our own
• The biggest enemy of the Church became the most powerful ally

References

1. "Who was Ananias in the Bible?". GotQuestions.org; visited May 29, 2020
2. "Ananias". Bible Gateway; visited May 30, 2020

Acts 6-8 & 10-11: The Transition

A major transition happened in the course of Christianity after the stoning of Stephen--the Word began to be preached to the Gentiles! In this episode we cover: Acts 6-7: The Stoning of Stephen Acts 8: Philip Preaches to the Samaritans & an Ethiopian Acts 10-11: Preaching to the Gentiles We'll get back to the conversion of Paul in Acts 9 next week! Also, what exactly does it mean to be a Gentile?

Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands...Acts 7:48 KJV

The Stoning of Stephen

When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.Acts 7:54 KJV

Stephen was one of the deacons chosen to assist the widows. He is devout man who performs many miracles within the community which enrages the Jews who don't follow Christ. Because of this, they accuse him of blasphemy—which was a very serious crime in Israelite society. When Stephen addresses the issue, he doesn't defend himself. Instead he gives a history of the Israelite nation, pointing out the similarities of his contemporaries to the forefathers who struggled with idolatry. This enrages them even more, so they kill him. Among the Jewish leaders who take part in this is Saul (later known as Paul)! Like Christ, Stephen's last words are a plea of forgiveness for those killing him.

Turning Point

This marks a major turning point in the history of Christianity. Before Stephen's murder, the gospel was only preached to the Jews. After his death, we see focus shift to spreading the gospel beyond the Israelites. This is important to remember as it often comes up in discussion about prophecy!

The Star of David?

⁴²Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness? ⁴³Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.Acts 7:42-43 KJV

During Stephen's speech to the Jewish leaders, he quotes Amos 5:26, which mentions the star of a foreign god that Israel has made "their star." The star in reference is the star known today as the Star of David—the hexagram. This star actually represents idolatry.[6][7][8] It is interesting that Amos condemned them for it in the Old Testament, Stephen condemns them again in the New Testament, and today that star is on the flag of Israel...

Preaching to the Gentiles

What Does Gentile Actually Mean?

The dictionary definition of Gentile is non-Jew, and this is how most Christians define it. However, if you pay close attention to the Bible, this definition seems amiss. Throughout the text we see Biblical authors refer to Hamites (descendants of Ham) and Semites (descendants of Shem) by their tribe names—Ethiopian, Egyptian, Canaanite, Philistine, etc. We never see the Israelites refer to these people as Gentiles and in Genesis 10:5, we see the "isle of the Gentiles" reference a place where Japheth's descendants reside. Furthermore, the Jews have a particular dislike for the Gentiles that is unlike their "separate-ness" from others. The Israelites frequently intermarry with the tribes from Ham and non-Israelite Semites, and we see in Acts 8 that Philip has no problem speaking to the Ethiopian or the Samaritans. Yet Peter has to get a divine message from God to feel comfortable meeting with the Roman Cornelius, and it is only after Peter shares the gospel with these Gentiles (Romans) that the disciples get together to demand answers.

The Samaritans

Acts 8:1-24 covers Philip preaching to the Samaritans. There were already believers in Samaria, many who had already been Baptized—remember when Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well? However, the Samaritans had not received the Holy Spirit, so Peter and John were sent to show miracles and bring the Holy Spirit to them. We are told multitudes were saved there.

Among those multitudes was a sorcerer named Simon who converts. Despite believing, Simon still doesn't fully understand. He desires the abilities Peter and John have (giving the Holy Spirit). He proposes paying for the abilities and is promptly rebuked. Simon's desire to skip the work and jump straight to the power is more common than we think. While many of us would not suggest we "pay" for God's gifts, many do have a desire to skip the process of working and expect all the benefits of a full relationship with Christ. Christ Himself said some things can only be done with prayer and fasting, which means we have to grow in our relationship with Him to be able to perform certain miracles (Matthew 17:19-21).

The Ethiopian

Philip also preaches to a man from "Ethiopia." I put Ethiopia in quotation marks because it is important to remember that here Ethiopia does not reference the country we think of today but rather a broad region in Africa including Cush, Ethiopia, and Nubia. This man is already a believer in the God of Abraham, but he is unsure of how Christ fits into the picture. After asking Philip, he receives the gospel and requests Baptism.

Candace

Many think "candace" is a proper name in Acts 8:27, however it is actually a title similar to pharaoh.[2][3]

Eunuch

There's a bit of a debate over whether the term eunuch is always literal in the Bible. [5] At the very least it refers to a man who is celibate, though if taken literally, it also means he is celibate because he is disfigured. It was common during the ancient days for those who guarded queens (and concubines) to be emasculated so the king wouldn't have to worry about these guards sleeping with the women [*resists urge to go off on a rant about the sexism involved here*].[4]

Cornelius

Cornelius is a Roman soldier who is a man of God seeking truth. God visits him and sends him to Simon Peter. This is the interaction that requires a vision from God to both men (Cornelius and Simon Peter). When Peter visits Cornelius (and his household), the Holy Spirit falls on everyone in there, including the Gentiles. It is this event that prompts the disciples to convene and discuss whether the Gentiles are to be included in the gospel, ultimately understanding that God has included them in salvation.

Baptism

Baptism is featured heavily in in these chapters. There are a few things I noticed in these chapters that I wanted to point out. One of the issues I had trying to get baptized in our time is that people don't want to baptize you into the Body of Christ, but into their denomination. When I brought this up to the pastor who eventually baptized me, he made a point about that fact that just as God meant for babies to be born into a family, so He meant for babes in the faith to be born into a family. On the surface this sounds great, but if you read Acts 8, it's apparent that after baptizing the Ethiopian, Philip leaves. Similarly, it does not suggest that anyone stays permanently in Samaria after baptizing the Samaritans.

Another issue I take with the way some congregations/denominations handle baptism is the requirement of baptismal classes. Philip shares the gospel with the Ethiopian, who is baptized on the spot because he truly believes. While we aren't told how much time elapsed during the journey, it doesn't seem to be more than a few days at most and could very well have been a few hours for all we know!

/>

References

1. "Gentile". Merriam Webster; visited May 19, 2020
2. Joshua J. Mark. "The Candaces of Meroe". Ancient History Encyclopedia. March 19, 2018
3. Brent MacDonald. "the Bible and the Kingdom of Cush - so called "Ethiopia"". Not Just Another Book. 2014
4. "Eunuch". Bible Study Tools; visited May 19, 2020
5. Megan Sauter"Eunuchs in the Bible". Bible Archeology. January 21, 2020
6. "Remphan". Bible Study Tools; visited May 19, 2020
7. George Lujack. "Star of David or Star of Remphan?". Scripture Truth Ministries. March 21, 2018
8. "In Acts 7:43, what are “the tabernacle of Moloch” and “the star of Remphan”?". Hermeneutics - Stack Exchange; visited May 19, 2020

Acts 1-5: The Early Days of the Church

Electing a 12th Apostle

The number 12 should stand out to you.Its the number of sons Jacob had. Its the number of tribes in Israel. Little known fact: its also the number of sons Abraham's first son, Ishmael, had as well. After Judas betrays Christ, the 12 disciples became the 11 disciples. We could speculate for all eternity why 12 men were needed, but the fact is, God sees something in the number 12. If He started a nation with 12 tribes (Israel) it makes sense that He'd launch His Kingdom with 12 disciples.

To do this, the remaining disciples had to select Judas' replacement. It's a daunting task to choose someone for spiritual positions, but here we see an example. They gathered together all the people who had been following Christ, a total of 120 people. All of them prayed together an got on one accord. They nominated two choices from within this group, and then allowed God to show them which man to choose.

Terminology

What's the Difference Between an Apostle and a Disciple?

Reading these chapters we see a greater use of the term apostle applied to anyone: the 12 Disciples shift to the 12 Apostles. I was quick to ask myself what is the difference? Who is an apostle and who is a disciple? I found differing opinions online and have linked some of the articles I found in the references section. Below is a what I took away from my research.

Apostle

The word apostle is actually heavily tied to Christianity and usage of the word before Christianity is very rare.[2] It refers to someone who is sent on a mission, more precisely someone with authority sent to preach the Word of God.[3] Generally speaking, it is usually applied to those who directly communicated with Christ. The 12 disciples and Paul, though Paul is only referred to as an apostle in his own letters. It seems to be a "promotion" from disciple.

Disciple

A disciple is both a student and a teacher. Part of discipleship is the act of spreading the message, just as an apostle would.[4] It seems to me that a disciple, though spreading the word, could refer to someone who has not come into his own yet and is not ready to teach without supervision.

The Seven Chosen to Serve

Within the body, there's a lot that needs to be done. We need to take care of each other. We need to spread the Word to non-believers. We need to teach and nurture believers who haven't become spiritual adults yet. Prioritization can easily trip us up if we aren't careful. As the disciples began to spread the Word, they were accused of neglecting the widows and had to determine how to handle the situation. It's important to realize that the first step was acknowledging that there was a problem. They didn't shirk the responsibility or argue that it wasn't important. However they did assess its priority within the larger mission. Since it was a task that didn't need to concern everyone in the body and could be completed with a handful of workers, they chose to select a small group for the task.

Notice that even though the group is small, each member is picked based on spiritual qualities. When we form groups (or ministries) within our local body we should be sure to pray about the people we chose and look for people that are spiritually sound.

Resistance

³⁶For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.
³⁷After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
³⁸And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
³⁹But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.Acts 5:36-39 KJV

In Matthew 10:22 and Matthew 24:9 Jesus warns the Apostles that they will be hated for following Him. In John 13:16, Jesus asks if a servant is greater than his master. We know that Jesus was hated and killed; if that's what the world did to Jesus, why wouldn't we expect the same treatment? In Acts, we see that the Church was persecuted from the beginning. The leaders in the community are not happy with the disciples and quickly move to silence them. They are thrown in jail, threatened, and forbidden to speak in the name of Jesus. Yet, they continue steadfastly in carrying out the mission Christ set for us.

The Stoning of Stephen

The leaders are so bent out of shape about the spread of Christ's teaching that they are willing to do anything to stop the disciples, even kill an innocent man. Stephen, one of the 7 men chosen to serve the widows, is the unfortunate person chosen to be killed. Stephen was performing miracles and becoming well known, so they accused him of blasphemy. The leaders even went through the trouble of setting up false witnesses to testify against him. There was a full out campaign to spread misinformation and turn the people against Stephen (just as they had done with Jesus). You will see that after Stephen is stoned, the focus shifts from preaching to the Jews to preaching to the world.

In the Name of Jesus

When I was in high school, I remember I was asked to give a prayer and they cautioned me not say "in Jesus' name" at the end because it might make some people feel uncomfortable. I don't remember wether I complied or not (I was still a babe in my faith then), but I do remember wondering why "God" is OK and "Jesus" is uncomfortable. There is power in the name of Christ and it is a clear sign of what God you are worshipping. It is a sign of allegiance and reminder to Satan that the battle has already been won. We must be like the disciples and continue with what God has called us to do despite what man is requesting.

But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.Acts 4:19 KJV

Relationship

Within these first six chapters of Acts, we get a great picture of the relationship between the followers of Christ. It is mentioned 5 times that they meet daily (Acts 2:46-47; 3:2; 5:42; 6:1). While they did meet at the Temple, they did not confine their relationship to that location. They met in each other's homes and shared meals together. I googled "the significance of sharing a meal" expecting to see information on Jewish culture of Biblical references, instead I found secular sources proclaiming the importance of sharing meals. From child development sites expressing the importance of family meals to mental health sites expressing the effect of eating with others on our mental health.[1] It seems everyone agrees that sharing a meal has a profound impact on our relationship with others.

Money

The disciples didn't just give 10% of their income and consider themselves sufficient, they gave all they had. People sold their homes and land to pool together their resources!

Communal Living

When I think about communal living, honestly, I think about cults. It is a common trend for cult leaders to move their followers out of the normal world, away from family and friends, and into the confines of their control. In this way, the cult leader has full access to his followers, ultimate authority, and no one distracting his followers. Knowing that the early church sold their belongs, including their homes, to fund each other and make sure everyone had sufficiently for their needs, it's easy to see why the Roman and Jewish leaders thought of it as a dangerous cult. Think about it: if a group from your church suddenly began meeting every day, sold everything they had, and pooled their money together, would you think that was dangerous and be wary of them?

When I think about it in full, from an ideal standpoint, I get the appeal. In a perfect Church system, no one would be without. For instance, right now as people suffer job losses from COVID-19, in a communal system, bills would still get paid by those able to work. There may be less food, but instead of one family having a surplus of food and another family starving, both families would have something to eat. Furthermore, it emphasizes selflessness and the concept of a Church family. Most parents would give the clothes off their back for their own child, but what about their neighbor's child? What about the child across town? Building a Church community that functions more like a family forces people to get on one accord and behave as a family. There's both beauty and power in this.

Of course, as I mentioned from the beginning, the dangers of it becoming cult-like are very real. We aren't perfect and we often stray from the teachings God has given us—primarily the commandment to worship God alone. Mankind is prone to worshipping mere men. Many churches today worship their pastor, and those in and out of the faith idolize celebrities. This habit of elevating humans is dangerous. This is what gives cult leaders their hold on people.

So what are we supposed to do? What would this look like, practically? A system like this could only work if everyone was cultivating their relationship with Christ individually. This is necessary to develop the discernment from the Holy Spirit (to identify false prophets). Each person would also have to develop the Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23) and renounce greed. Checks and balances with leaders would be necessary as well—we all know when one man or woman has all the power, things don't end well.

Ananias and Sapphira

Probably the 2nd most popular (or well known) incident from this section is the death of Ananias and Sapphira. This married couple sold their belongings like many of the other disciples, but chose to give only a portion to the group and ended up dead. The context of this is important, because people can easily misuse this passage to instill fear into people. The break from chapter 4 to chapter 5, in my opinion, is misplaced. Acts 4:32-37 should not be separated from Acts 5:1-11, because it all goes together. In Acts 4, we learn that many of the disciples were freely giving what they had to the group. A man named Joses (who may or may not be the same as Joseph mentioned in Acts 1) was lead to sell his land and give everything he had. It is in the midst of this culture that Ananias and Sapphira lie about how much they were given for their possession and withhold a portion for themselves.

Joses and the couple are given as examples, one as the ideal, and the other as what not to do (just like Cain and Abel). As such, we should notice the similarities and differences in each scenario.

The Similarities

1. Neither was commanded to give
2. Both involved the sale of something and remitting the money to the group
3. Both sold land

The Difference

1. Joses gave everything; Ananias and Sapphira kept a portion for themselves
2. Joses told the Apostles he was giving everything and actually gave everything; Ananias and Sapphira lied about how much they were giving

The key components in this instance are freewill and trust. Peter reminds the couple that the possession was theirs and in their control the whole time. Imagine, you see everyone around you selling everything they have that is valuable to give to people who are complete strangers. You can bet that some people were not so comfortable and ready to do the same. However, those who did were probably praised and admired. If the majority of the group is doing this, those who weren't quite ready would likely feel pressured to do the same even though know command had been given. In this, we see giving akin to Cain and Abel, where Abel gave the best he had freely and Cain held back. Essentially, they didn't trust their new family enough to give all they had to the cause.

The question I have is, would it have been different if they had said "we have sold our possession and we would like to give half"? Peter seems the most outraged that they lied, not that they didn't commit to giving the whole portion. If they had said, "we aren't ready yet," would the group have prayed for them and been encouraging?

⁴¹And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.
⁴²And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. Acts 5:41-42 NKJV

References

1. "Search: The Significance of Sharing a Meal". Google; visited March 9, 2020
2. "Apostle". Bible Study Tools; visited May 9, 2020
3. "Apostle". Merriam-Webster; visited May 9, 2020
4. "Disciple". Merriam-Webster; visited May 9, 2020
5. Jonathan Potter. "Apostles vs. Disciples". Bible Odyssey.