I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 26-28.

    I have previously noted that Paul seems to be someone who stirred up animosity wherever he went. He does not appear to have been the most diplomatic of fellows. However, this lack of tact or diplomacy seems to have been a conscious decision rather than an inability to be diplomatic or tactful. In today’s passage, Paul presents his defense to King Agrippa. In that introduction, and throughout his defense, Paul is very complimentary towards King Agrippa. It is interesting to note that at the beginning of his defense Paul stated that he believed that God could raise the dead. However, Festus, the Roman governor, did not question Paul’s sanity until Paul stated that Someone had actually risen from the dead.
    Having said this I want to circle back to some things Paul said while he was describing what he preached. First, he talked about how he preached first in Damascus, then Jerusalem and so on. His wording reminds me of what Jesus said in the Great Commission. I think that Luke is showing us how Paul’s ministry mirrored Jesus’ instructions to the disciples (and Paul may have been doing similarly in his speech). The other point is Paul’s summation of what he preached. People must repent of their sins and turn to God. However, that is not enough, they must demonstrate they have changed by doing good things.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 23-25.

    Paul’s trial before the Sanhedrin demonstrates that many times the things which divide those who oppose Christians are wider than their disagreement with Christianity. Paul took advantage of that division, we should not be afraid to tailor our arguments to those who oppose us to do the same. Then when Paul was on trial before the Roman governor Felix his accusers made charges which look very specific, but on closer examination prove to be hearsay and and rumor. They believed these things were true because they were predisposed to believe the worst about those who followed The Way (Christians). Governor Felix was unwilling to have Paul executed because he could not find any evidence showing his guilt, but he was unwilling to upset the political powers among the Jews by releasing him.
    Two years later when Felix was replaced by Festus as governor, Paul was still a prisoner (albeit one with many privileges). Festus was also unwilling to release Paul. Festsu claimed that if Paul had not appealed to Caesar he could have (implying that he would have) released Paul. However, Paul only appealed to Caesar because Festus wanted to transfer Paul to Jerusalem for trial. Paul was aware that some of the Jews were planning to kill him during the transfer. If Festus truly wished to release Paul he could have done so before Paul appealed to Caesar.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 21-22.

Luke tells us that as Paul was traveling to Jerusalem he repeatedly met with people who prophesied that he would be bound and imprisoned if he completed his journey as planned. Despite these warnings, Paul was determined to complete his journey. I have often heard people speak and write about Paul’s great faith demonstrated here. Paul said that he was willing to be imprisoned for his faith, even to die for it. We should certainly have faith similar to Paul’s in this regard. However, I wonder if the Holy Spirit was inspiring these prophets in order to guide Paul to changing his plans. Before you reject that idea I want to point out that the Bible contains many examples of the failings of great men of God. Having made that point, I still believe that Paul’s willingness to face imprisonment and death should serve to inspire us to be faithful in the face of whatever opposition we meet.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 19-20.

    There are several places in the Acts of the Apostles where Luke makes a distinction between baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit, between the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus, with the latter involving the Holy Spirit. I am not sure what this means, but I think we as a Church have lost something important in losing this distinction. I want to be clear that I understand intellectually the distinction they are making. As I write that I realize that perhaps to a degree I do understand that distinction. I believe that one of the reasons I have trouble seeing it is the modern Church’s separation of baptism from the confession of faith. The older I get the more convinced I am that baptism should, as a general rule, immediately follow confession of faith as we see in the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch.

    Paul ministered in Ephesus for over two years. He rented a lecture hall to speak in after some of the Jews objected to him preaching Christianity in the synagogue. I never noticed this before, but throughout the Acts of the Apostles Luke emphasizes that the division between Christianity and Judaism was created by certain Jews rejecting Christianity and pushing it out of the synagogues. In other words, Luke wants his readers to see that Christianity is only a separate religion because some Jews were unwilling to accept it as being an interpretation of Judaism. I believe that modern Messianic Jews practice something close to what Paul originally tried to preach. I, also, believe that Paul saw the rejection by many Jews as God directing him to build what became today’s Church (this is in no way a criticism of Messianic Jews).

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 17-18.

    “While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was deeply troubled by all the idols he saw everywhere in the city.” Are we troubled by the idols that are all around us in our society today? When Paul was in Athens he engaged the philosophers there in debate. He was not afraid of their ridicule. He presented his beliefs so that they invited him to speak to them at the equivalent to our modern Sunday morning news talk shows(Meet the Press, Face the Nation, This Week), except that more of the audience could respond to the speaker than with those shows. In response to Paul’s speaking there, some laughed at him for believing in the resurrection of the dead, some wanted to hear more, and some became believers. If we seek to preach the Good News of Jesus to those who do not yet believe, we will need to be willing to face ridicule from those who will refuse to believe.

    When Paul first arrived in Corinth he worked with Priscilla and Aquila as a tent-maker (or perhaps as a leatherworker). He went to the synagogues on the Sabbath and tried to convince those there that Jesus was the Messiah. After Silas and Timothy joined him in Corinth Paul spent all of his time preaching the Gospel. This is interesting because it suggests that Silas and/or Timothy did what was needed to support all of them once they arrived. While before that Paul worked to support himself. It is also interesting that it was after the arrival of Silas and Timothy that Paul had his falling out with the Jews of Corinth.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 14-16.

    Paul was clearly a divisive personality. We see that when he was traveling with Barnabas that in city after city there was division in the town. Some people strongly supported Paul, some strongly opposed him. Paul did not avoid confrontation. Then after Paul’s falling out with Barnabas, once more a mob was stirred up against Paul’s teaching. Our calling is not to avoid confronting sinners. Our calling is to preach the Good News of Jesus Christ and to confront those who obstruct those who seek the Lord.
    I want to bring attention to the fact that when Paul and Silas were jailed, they did not take advantage of the opportunity to escape which the earthquake gave them. I have always been impressed by this story. Here were Paul and Silas. They had been arrested, stripped and beaten, and put in chains in prison. They had severely restricted movement. Yet, they spent their time praying and singing hymns to praise God. They were such an influence that none of the other prisoners took the opportunity to escape afforded by the earthquake either. Finally, when the government officials ordered their release, Paul stood on his rights and demanded the officials apologize for the injustice they had committed. I do not believe that Paul did this for his own advantage. Rather, I think that Paul was using this as an educational moment to teach the government officials to not be so quick to commit injustices in the future.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 11-13.

    When Peter returned to Jerusalem from Cornelius’ house, the Jewish believers there (pretty much the only kind there were at this point outside of Cornelius’ household) criticized him for eating with a Gentile and staying in his home. However, and this is a very important however, once Peter explained the full story about why he agreed to go to Cornelius’ house, and what happened once he got there, they not only stopped objecting, they began to praise God for what had happened. It is worth noting that Peter had six witnesses to his account of what happened at Cornelius’ house(even though he was the only one who saw the vision). We should strive to imitate this. Peter did not get angry and defensive when other believers criticized his decision and those who criticized him listened to his explanation for his actions.

    Shortly after Peter went to Cornelius’ house word came to Jerusalem that believers in Antioch were preaching to Gentiles. The Church in Jerusalem was concerned about what these Gentiles were being taught, so they sent Barnabas. In context, it seems to me that what made this situation special, even after Peter baptized Cornelius and his household, was that these new believers were not “God-fearing” Gentiles before their conversion. That is, they were not Gentiles who attended the synagogue, prayed to God, and otherwise followed Jewish Law. When Barnabas saw how much they needed to learn about who God was and what God expected, he went and got the most knowledgeable person he knew on Jewish law and traditions, Saul. Another important lesson, we cannot necessarily expect new believers to just know the basics about what it means to be a Christian.