There Arose Such a Clatter

 This is the study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 9, to study Acts 2. And it's late...sorry about that.

Read through the chapter a few times and note details of action. There is a lot of speech in this chapter but try to focus on the action. Make notes of who's doing what. That should help you put yourself into the scene in different places. Jot down what you think about what's happening. And write down questions about the text. What Luke wrote, why that particular way, and so on. You will have more questions if you read the chapter in more translations.

Once you have your notes, go back through with a commentary or study Bible and make any modifications to your own notes and questions. You may have more questions after looking at a commentary. Bring these to the study group.

After you go through a commentary, go back through with the questions below:

• The disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit who then gives them the ability to speak clearly in other languages. Why do you think it was important for the Holy Spirit to enable them to speak clearly? And yet, everyone seems to know they are Galileans. If it wasn't their accent, then how do you think the people knew?
• Some think they're drunk. If all could hear clearly spoken things of God in their own language, why do you think that would suggest drunkenness? When does drunkenness increase intelligibility?
• Peter draws from the end of Joel, who prophesies about the "Great Day of the Lord". How do you think Jesus' life and ascension is the "Great Day of the Lord"? How did His life, death, resurrection, and ascension match the description Peter quotes?
• So, of those from all over (see verses 9 to 11) join the 120, adding 3,000 to their number, how many stayed in Jerusalem? Did some go back to those areas? What can you find out about the Jewish pilgrimage process in the first century AD?
• If the group of disciples grew from 120 to 3,000, what sort of problems do you think that would cause? What do you think of their solution in verses 44 and 45?

I'll stop there. I have lots more questions. The chapter makes my head spin. Bring your clarity and prayer requests.

See you Thursday!

Why A Twelfth?

 When I was  a kid, it never occurred to me to ask why the disciples wanted to choose a twelfth man. Never. And then one day, later in my Bible learning days, I was part of a discussion where some guy claimed that the disciples were jumping the gun. His claim was that Luke's point in Acts was that the disciples chose Matthias, but God chose Paul.

That had seriously never occurred to me. His reasoning was flimsy, somewhat. And I thought his definition of 'apostle' was lacking, or at least was more narrow than the biblical range of meaning. Yet, I didn't have an alternate theory. It never occurred to me to ask. Honestly I still don't have a great theory, and merely critique the views of others. That critiquing is so easy is one reason I haven't come up with one myself.

If you use internal evidence, though, a theory may not be necessary. Let's look at the reason(s) Peter gives:

“Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was counted among us and received his share in this ministry.” (Acts 1:16-17 NASB)

“For it is written in the book of Psalms,
‘LET HIS HOMESTEAD BE MADE DESOLATE,
AND LET NO ONE DWELL IN IT’;
and,
‘LET ANOTHER MAN TAKE HIS OFFICE.’
Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us— beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us—one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.” (Acts 1:20-22 NASB)

If you have never checked Peter's references, he uses Psalm 69:25, and 109:8. If you decide to look those verses up, you find he didn't use the entire verse (to be fair, the Psalms weren't divided up into verses at that time). And if you check the context, you find one Psalm commonly thought to describe Jesus (Psalm 69), and another that certainly could (Psalm 109).

On the surface, if you don't check those Psalms, or check the context of what Peter used, you may think Peter is merely proof-texting. But context sort of supports his use. That was my first surprise. But the other surprise was more important. Look at the last sentence. There, right on the surface, is the  reason for the twelfth man.

It wasn't to ensure they had someone to judge the twelve tribes in Judas' absence (at least one commentary had that one). It wasn't an error, jumping ahead of God who wanted Paul, because he couldn't be a witness to the entire life of Jesus. It wasn't any other of a dozen other options...ok, maybe two others. Anyway, what Peter says is actually what makes the most sense.

The only record of the life of Jesus was in those who were there, those who ate with Him, who walked, literally walked, with Him. Only they could attest to the words and deeds of Jesus while He was among His human creatures. Consider the words with which John ends his Gospel, where he claims that not all the words and deeds were recorded because that wasn't possible (John 21:25). We miss a lot because those witnesses are no longer among us.

But one question remains. Why twelve? There were obviously options among them who had been with Jesus in the period Peter describes. The people reduced the options to two, and God chose 1 of them to make 12. But why twelve? Maybe it was to round out the judges of the twelve tribes, but then, wouldn't their tribal heritage be important? Maybe it was to correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel. Although that simply runs into the same problem. 

The truth, the reality we have, is that our Savior didn't think it was important to tell us why. Maybe the people of that day didn't need to be told, they had received that knowledge verbally already. Maybe it just sucks to be us, 2,000 years later, wishing we could be flies on walls of the early churches.

I think it's likely that this piece of the information, while interesting, isn't important to our Savior. He had His purpose, it was fulfilled in the choice, now move on. This is my theory. I don't know if I'm right or not, our Savior doesn't tell us. But there are a lot of other things He does tell us. I think I'll move on to those.

What's Going On, Where'd He Go, And Who are These Guys?

 This is the Weekly study guide for the Thursday Bible Study Group meeting November 18 to study Acts, Chapter 1. Hopefully, you've had a chance to read the whole book of Acts, at least once. If not, do that. 

After you've read the entire book, read through Chapter 1 carefully. Think through what Luke thinks is important. Try to imagine you are Theophilus, and imagine what he might think of this beginning. It may help to read the last chapter of Luke's Gospel.

As you read, jot down questions, and make notes to bring to the meeting. The Holy Spirit, having inspired these words, wants to illuminate our hearts and minds to understand them. It's so important to Him, that He preserved these words above all others on this planet, more than the words of any other culture. Consider what you read as that important.

Once you've gone through with a commentary or your study Bible notes. Make any adjustments to your questions and notes. Once you've done that, go back through with the few questions below:

• In Luke 1:3, Luke refers to Theophilus as “most excellent”, an honorific term he reserves for Roman governmental officials. That reference is missing here, in verse 1. Why do you think Luke would not feel the need for the honorific reference in his “second work”?
• In verse 3, Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of God, and in verse 6, the disciples ask about the Kingdom of Israel. Considering that Luke is a Gentile, and probably writing this for Gentiles, why do you think he chose this wording difference? Consider how new Gentile believers might have read and understood it, what do you think it meant to them?
• The term “baptism”/”baptize” occurs 26 times in the NASB translation of Acts. Only here is it used as “baptism of/in/by the Holy Spirit” in all of Acts. Prior to this, only John the Baptist uses the term to refer to Jesus, comparing his baptism (with water) and Jesus’ (with the Holy Spirit and fire). What do you think baptism of/by/in the Holy Spirit means? And how do you think it is like, or unlike, being baptized in water?
• Why the angels? Were the disciples there so long, it was necessary for an angelic appearance to move them along? The term means “messenger”, so consider their message. Why do you think that message was so important?
• Peter quotes Psalm 69 and 109 to explain that Judas needed to be replaced. Consider the context of the verses he uses (Psalm 69:25, Psalm 109:8). Why do you think those verses told Peter that Judas was to be replaced by someone else? 

Remember to bring your questions and notes to the group to share, and be ready to hear from others.

See you Thursday!

Road Map for our Journey Through Acts

It seems like forever since I've posted to this page, and it was surreal to review some of the last entries. In our Bible study group, we have decided to go through Acts, stopping to read the letter of Paul where we think it may have been written, and returning to Acts. Many of them are considered "Prison Epistles" meaning they were written while Paul was imprisoned in Rome. Those would covered after we finish Acts.

Below is a brief outline of how Acts and the Epistles of Paul may correlate:

1. Acts 1 through 14 - Up through Paul and Barnabas' first missionary journey, but before the council in Jerusalem.
2. Galatians (written from Antioch)
3. Acts 15 through 18:17
4. Thessalonians (both) (written from Corinth)
5. Acts 18:18 through 19
6. Corinthians (both) (written from Ephesus)
7. Acts 20:1-3, and Romans (written from Corinth)
8. Acts 20:4 through Acts 28
9. Prison Epistles: Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Timothy (both), and Titus.

This outline is one I've come up with after looking through Reading God's Word: A Chronological Daily Bible by George H. Guthrie. I've deviated slightly where I thought it made more sense.

Another good resource online is at one of my favorite online Bible study resource sites, The Blue Letter Bible. There I found another timeline for Acts and the other New Testament writing:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/pnt/pnt02.cfm

Now, regarding an approach to studying Acts (or any Bible passage), I have my opinions, and I hold them strongly. You are obviously permitted to follow whatever approach you like. My basic approach is as follows:

1. Read it for yourself first. Make your own notes, jot down your own questions.
2. Read it again and revise your notes/questions.
3. Now read other stuff, study Bible notes, commentaries, whatever.
4. Revise your notes/questions based off further reading/opinions.
5. Come ready to discuss and share your experience (notes and questions).

I have my reasons for this approach, but it is partly rooted in a foundational distrust for commentaries and study notes. I don't really trust a particular translation entirely, and will use several.

So, to prepare for our study, I highly recommend reading through as much of Acts as you can in a single sitting. I urge you to set aside time to push through as much as possible at a time. This provides the best overview of the book, enabling you to see it more as a whole than to get lost in its parts. We will get into the details, I promise.

You may also want to have access to a few different translations as we go through our study. I recommend trying very diverse translations, but to try and stick to translations, not paraphrased Bibles. I still consider paraphrases as Bibles, it's just they obscure the word choices of translators. If you want to spot places where rendering the Greek or Hebrew into English was especially difficult, use diverse translations. The benefit is the insight into the range of possible meaning of passages.

There are a number of "introductions" to the book of Acts available online. As I explained above, I encourage you to read through it at least once before looking at an introduction. The link/URL below has a few from which to choose (just scroll down to Acts). Try starting with the bottom one and work your way up.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/resources/intros.cfm

I will bring a timeline I found on my bookshelf, and we can share other resources we've found to help set the stage and tone for Acts. I'm not planning on starting into the text this coming week, but we may.

I hope to see you all there!

Blessings upon you all!