Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Christians and Culture
When I came to LIALC, our first Youth Group series, re:View, was on worldview.  The major focus of that series was on understanding and impacting culture.  One thing that we mentioned a lot was Paul's interactions in Acts 17.  The fact is, we cannot escape our culture.  Unless we never leave our homes or watch TV or use the internet, we WILL experience culture in some way.  Some things in culture are good, some are bad, some are neutral.  We need to figure out how to separate those things.  But what is our response to our culture at large?  There are three main responses:

1. Be offended and withdraw:  seek to avoid the culture at all costs.
2. Be delighted and assimilate:  wholeheartedly accept everything culture has to offer.  This "Christian" is indistinguishable from anyone else in the culture.
3.  Be distressed and engage:  this is Paul's response.

Paul looks around at the culture of Athens and doesn't go hide under a rock.  Neither does he go and experience all the things that Athens has to offer.  Rather, he is DISTRESSED.  He looks around and he aches for the lostness of that city.  So what is his response?  He ENGAGES.  He goes and speaks to the people of Athens in ways that they can understand.  Compare Paul's speech here to the other speeches we've read throughout Acts.  The differences are HUGE.  Why?  Because his audience here is vastly different and he seeks to explain the good news in ways that they understand.

So - which response do you have?  Are you distressed by our culture?  Or are you angry about it?  Or happy and enjoying it?  What are some ways that we can ENGAGE our culture?

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Christians and Political Rights
An interesting issue that comes up today.  I'd love to see you discuss a bit.  I won't be able to interact since I'm in Mexico, but I'd love to see what you all think.

In verse 37 Paul does something interesting, at least for him:  he uses his rights.  There is a lot of talk in the NT about giving up all things, even ourselves, to follow Jesus.  Paul suffers abuse at the hands of many different kinds of people, but this time is different.  Rather than just leaving the prison, but essentially says "No!  You can't treat Roman citizens this way!"  Paul was, in fact, a Roman citizen, and Roman citizens were not permitted to be punished in such a way without trial.  Rather than letting it go, Paul actually (surprisingly!) makes a big deal out of it.  Why?

"Yet for the two missionaries to leave without protesting the way they were treated “could have set a dangerous precedent for the future treatment of missionaries and also could have left the Christians in Philippi exposed to arbitrary treatment from the magistrates.” Therefore they insisted on a public apology, which would ultimately influence the public standing of the mission and the church there. Paul’s claim to Roman citizenship proved to be a turning point again in Jerusalem (22:25–29)." [1]

Whether or not this is the reason they act as they do, the fact is that Paul makes use of his political rights.  So, what do you think?  Is it "right" for Christians to make use of their political rights?  Do you think there are instances in which we should let political mistreatment slide for the sake of the Gospel, or should we always fully make use of our political rights?

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Timothy and Luke
Two things dealing with people today -

Timothy: He joins Paul in our reading today, and a strange thing happens:  Paul circumcises him.  After the huge fight that Paul put up against the people who wanted Gentiles to get circumcised in Acts 15, you wouldn't expect him to do that, would you?  But I don't think Paul is being inconsistent: he is removing a stumbling block.  Paul knows and affirms (as certainly Timothy does too) that it is not NECESSARY for Gentile Christians to be circumcised, but they also want an audience that is willing to listen and so it is USEFUL for Timothy to do so.  If Timothy were not circumcised, they would immediately lose any opportunity of addressing Jews.  And so, for the good of the Good News, Timothy submits so that they might reach Jews.

Luke:  Just an interesting observation - in verse 8 Luke joins Paul and Timothy at Troas.  How do we know?  Note the pronoun change in verse 10:  up until this point, the writing is all "they did....".  In verse 10 Luke writes, "...we sought to go on..."  Not especially significant, but I think it's interesting.

Hey everyone.  Quick announcement:

Tomorrow morning I'm leaving for Mexico for about a week, so I won't be able to respond and interact with comments on the blog during that time.  I've written the posts in advance and Rachel will be posting them while I'm gone, so you can still follow along during that time.

greg

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Abstain From What!?
Continuing from yesterday, we have a rather interesting conclusion to the Jerusalem council.  James (Jesus' half-brother) chimes in at the end, agreeing that Gentiles should not have to bear the yoke of the law.  Interestingly, he names a few other things in addition.  These things then go out in a letter to the churches affirming the Gospel to the Gentiles apart from observing the Law:

1. Abstain from meat sacrificed to idols
2. Abstain from eating blood
3. Abstain from meat that was strangled
4. Abstain from sexual immorality

Before you go thinking that this is really weird, let me explain.  It actually makes A LOT of sense, particularly after our brief discussion yesterday regarding culture and the Gospel.  What ties these things together?  The first three things are items that would not be eaten by Jews.  Consuming these things would mean that the Jews most likely would not eat with the Gentiles - culturally ingrained rules and tastes are hard to change quickly, and there is no command that says that Jews MUST change their diet in light of the Gospel.  Rather than being about prohibition, this is about fellowship.  They ask Gentiles to abstain from these things in order that Jewish and Gentile Christians can fellowship together.

But what about the fourth prohibition?
"The prohibition of sexual immorality (porneia) seems to belong to a different category from the rest, and it appears out of place in this list. Surely it goes without saying that sexual immorality is prohibited for Christians. I think that there was so much immorality in some of these places, like Antioch (which was notorious for its immorality), that the churches were also affected by the immorality surrounding them. Therefore a special warning was necessary. Perhaps this prohibition was implying that immoral church members should not be extended the privilege of table fellowship with Christians (cf. 1 Cor. 5:9–11). This explanation would then tie in this prohibition with the other three." [1]

Remember, it's not about rules, it's about relationships and fellowship.

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Are Christians Jewish?
That is the question for today, and it is a difficult one.  There has been a lot of work done in the area of harmonizing Acts with Galatians 1-2, but we'll deal with that in more depth when we reach Galatians.  First, a summary of what the issues are in Acts 15.

Paul and Barnabas get into a scuffle with some men that are saying that in order to be saved, people must be circumcised.  There is a huge argument, and it becomes apparent that the only way to resolve it is to gather together the leaders of the Church, discuss things, and come to a unified decision so that there is a basis for the "correct" view.  Practically, this means that Paul and Barnabas, instead of appealing to their own message, can appeal instead to the decision of the Church as a whole, supported Biblically and experientially.

Before we move on, a clarification needs to be made.  I think that from what we have read in Acts so far in the various speeches/sermons, the early church understands the Good News clearly - it is NOT based on works.  I think that the "men from Judea" that were teaching were saying that salvation was by works, they would have been flat-out rejected because the Church KNOWS that salvation is by Jesus alone.  There would have been no argument between those teachers and Paul/Barnabas because they would CLEARLY have been in the wrong.  It's very easy to see "you must be circumcised to be saved" and think "works salvation".  I definitely agree that it strongly leans things in that direction, but I think that the issue of debate in Acts 15 is more nuanced than that. 

So then, what IS the question they are dealing with in Acts 15?  I think the question here is not "Is salvation by works?" but "Do you have to be Jewish to be saved?"  Understand that up until Peter's dream just a few chapters ago, there was very little thought about salvation for Gentiles.  Now Gentiles have received salvation.  They have received the Holy Spirit.  Paul and Barnabas have gone to preach the Good News to them.  The question now is:  "After you accept Jesus, do you have do all that Jewish stuff?"  As I said, to our eyes that can easily look like a question of earning your salvation, but to the early Church it was hard to separate being a child of God and being Jewish because Gentile salvation was so new to them all.  To them it was more a question of response - is it necessary after receiving salvation to now act like "God's chosen people (Israel)"?  This is what the discussion in Acts 15 revolves around, NOT trying to figure out if salvation is by works or not.  Salvation is through Jesus' death and resurrection alone - that was certain.

With this understanding the events and discussion in Acts 15 make more sense.  Peter stands up and essentially says: "Look guys, they received the Holy Spirit just like we did - without being Jewish! God cleansed their hearts through faith, not Jewishness" (v. 8-9).  He goes on to say that it would be ridiculous to require them to follow the Law because NO ONE has been able to keep it, not even the most perfect Jew (except Jesus!).  He affirms that salvation is by grace in verse 11, in essence saying that is the end of the story - Jews and Gentiles are both saved by grace whether they are ATTEMPTING to keep the Law or not.

Paul and Barnabas testify to essentially the same thing:  salvation is received and lives are changed apart from being circumcised and following the Law - God works in Gentile hearts in a culturally-Gentile way. 

It's important to realize what this chapter does and DOESN'T say.  This is a discussion about the actions of Gentile believers.  There is no mention of how Jewish believers in Jesus should act.  There is no suggestion that they should abandon the keeping of the Law that they have sought for so long.  Don't worry though - that will come later, in Hebrews.

In its essence, we are still dealing with this question today:  how do people follow God in culturally appropriate ways?  We'll deal with James' statements and the letter tomorrow, so stay tuned.

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Historical Background:  Stoning
In today's passage,  Paul is stoned in Lystra.  Here's some historical background on what exactly that entailed:

    "Stoning was the most common method of biblical execution (Lev 24:13–16; Deut 17:2–7), and the images of it are evocative, to say the least. Stoning was a death of surpassing brutality. Rabbinic lore describes how a man was to be thrown from a cliff and crushed on the chest with a large stone. If still alive, the victim was then pelted with smaller stones until dead. This ghastly image is magnified by the fact that stoning was a communal sentence carried out by the common people. It was excommunication from the community in the most dire sense. Furthermore, the weapons were the very stones of the land of Israel.
    Most of the crimes for which stoning was prescribed were public offenses against the integrity of the community of faith, and this explains the communal nature of its method. Blasphemy, idolatry, spirit divination, false prophecy, adultery, the disobedience of a son and child sacrifice were all to be punished by stoning. A particularly heinous offense was seducing others to forsake Yahweh (Deut 13); there was to be no compassion or mercy, even between family members. Thus Achan and his family are stoned for stealing sacred spoils and “troubling” Israel (Josh 7:1–26).
    The most graphic images of stoning come from the NT, with Stephen’s untimely death by stoning at the hands of a mob (Acts 7:58) and the attempted stoning of Jesus by his own townspeople (Lk 4:29). The unsettling brutality of stoning expresses the seriousness with which Israel viewed the sanctity of the community and the danger for those who transgressed. Offenders were crushed by the stones of the land and by the hands of the people." [1]  (emphasis mine)

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

We Are Made To Worship 
Today is an interesting read because it's the first time we encounter anything like this in the NT so far.  When Jesus did miracles, the audience was always thoroughly Jewish and would NEVER worship Him as a god (which of course is incredibly ironic since He is the one TRUE God).  The same is true for the most part in Acts so far - when the disciples perform miracles, it is in the presence of mostly Jews.  Now the Acts is transitioning to ministry to the Gentiles, we see a MUCH different reaction to Paul and Barnabas.

So why did the people worship them?

    "Identification of Paul and Barnabas with Zeus and Hermes (vv. 11–12) is understandable, for “Zeus was the most widely worshipped God in Galatia.… [and] was often linked with other gods. In the territory of Lystra there are carvings and inscriptions which show Zeus accompanied by Hermes.” The frenzied response of the Lystrans may be traced to an ancient legend retold by Ovid (43 B.C.–a.d. 17) in his Metamorphosis. Zeus and Hermes once visited the Phrygian hill country disguised as ordinary men. They were turned away from a thousand homes where they sought lodging, but were finally taken in by an elderly couple into their humble home. The gods turned that house into a temple and destroyed all the houses that had rejected them.
    Paul and Barnabas could not understand what was being said by the people since they were shouting “in the Lycaonian language” (v. 11). This accounts for their delayed response to plans to offer sacrifices to them. When they found this out, their response was swift and typically Jewish (v. 14). “Jewish people were required to tear their clothes when they heard blasphemy.” It was an opposite reaction to Herod when he was equated to a god (12:22–23)." [1]

This explains some of the background of why the people thought they were Zeus and Hermes, but I don't think it really gives us a good "why".  Why did they respond in worship when they saw these wonders? 

Because we are all made to worship.

One of the more famous questions and answers in the Westminster Catechism is "What is the chief end of man?"  Meaning "Why are we here?  What is the purpose of life?"  The answer given is:

"The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever."

We are made in the image of God for the purpose of worshiping and enjoying Him.  It is what we are MADE TO DO.  It is our purpose.  It is the ultimate "why" of our existence.

The problem?  As Romans chapter 1 tells us, everyone knows that there is a God because He reveals Himself in creation, yet we suppress that true to worship created things.  In this case, the people have suppressed their knowledge of God and worship other men: Paul and Barnabas.  In other cases, they worshiped the sun or the rivers or any number of other things.  But of course we, the educated people of today would NEVER be so simple as to do something like that, would we? (it's hard to indicate sarcasm in writing, so please understand that the previous statement is dripping with sarcasm)

Today, we don't (usually) worship snakes and rivers and trees, but things far less impressive like trophies and money and success.  Not only has our culture for the most part suppressed the knowledge and worship of God, it seems that most of us have even lost the ability to worship anything outside ourselves.  Instead our passions and goals and efforts are all built upon our accomplishments.  Make no mistake:  we are born to worship, and if we don't worship God we WILL worship something else.  As John Calvin wrote: "The human heart is an idol factory."

So what we see here isn't all that unusual.  The people saw something amazing and powerful.  They responded how all of us are MADE to respond:  they worshiped.  But the problem is that they were worshiping the wrong thing. 

So that's my question for today:  are you worshiping the wrong thing?  What drives your choices?  Toward what are you giving the most effort?  What takes up the majority of your time and attention?  No matter what you might WANT to say that you are worshiping, the answer to those questions reveal the real answer.  You become what you worship, so pay close attention to your life.

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Understanding Big Concepts  
Today is another sermon in Acts, this one from Paul.  Rather than focusing on the sermon, which is deals heavily with the history of Israel, I want to focus on the response.  The Jews totally reject the message here, and so the evangelists move on to speak to the Gentiles.  I mentioned this a bit before, but I wanted to spend some time again on this idea that the Jesus is the Messiah first for the Jew, then the Gentile.  This is a big and somewhat difficult concept for us to understand in the modern world, so far removed from the time of the early Church.  Keep your eye on this concept, because you'll see a transition in Acts from focusing mainly on Jews to focusing on Paul's ministry with Gentiles.  Read was NIVAC has to say:

    "The Jews probably did not expect to see nearly the whole city there on that day (v. 44). Their jealousy is aroused, and they oppose Paul’s next message with abusive talk (v. 45). Paul and Barnabas respond to this by stating what became a feature of their ministry and of Paul’s theology: They preach to the Jews first, but if their response is unworthy of eternal life, they go to the Gentiles (v. 46). Paul backs that step from the Scriptures (v. 47). While he would have spoken with confidence on this occasion, this phenomenon of Jewish rejection of the gospel hurts him deeply and inflames his desire to yearn and pray for their salvation (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1).
    In Romans 9–11 Paul uses his great theological skill for a profound exploration of the implications of and reasons for this rejection. In fact, a part of Romans 9–11 is in some ways an exposition of Acts 13:47. The receptivity of the Gentiles was remarkable, considering the fact that the imperial cult (public worship of the emperor) was strong in Antioch." [1] (emphasis mine)

We'll definitely be dealing with this in more detail in Romans 9-11, but as I said, keep this in mind because we'll be seeing a big shift in Acts based on this concept.

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

First of all - I'm aware it's been a while since we've done a Friday giveaway.  Things have been busy, but be patient!  We'll have one in a few weeks.

The Bigger Team
Something different for today:  a short little Bible study on missions for you.  The Mexico STM leaves next Thursday, so this is a very timely study.

Read over Acts 13:1-4 again more closely, then answer the questions.  You don't have to put your answers in the comments, but please do let me know some of your thoughts after doing it, particularly on the final question!

Who really sent Paul and Barnabas as missionaries?

How was their “home church” involved?

What did the church do before sending them out?

What are some of the ways that people who are NOT going on a missions trip can be part of God’s work in that trip?

Why do we as Christians “do” missions? (Feel free to use whatever Bible verses or other resources you need to answer)