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

I am not sure why I keep feeling like I need to write about teaching the Gospel from the Old Testament, but that is where I am again today.  Today’s chapter begins with Luke saying that it was Paul’s custom to go into the synagogue in every new city he visited and reason from Scripture (which at that time meant the Old Testament) that the Messiah would suffer and rise from the dead.  We see he did that in Thessalonica.  Then in Berea Luke tells us that the Jews examined the Scripture to see if what Paul said was true.  Then towards the end of today’s passage we have the account of Apollos in Ephesus.  Luke tells us that Apollos had thorough knowledge of the Scripture and taught about Jesus accurately, even though he only knew of the baptism of John.  After receiving some instruction from Aquila and Priscilla, Apollos went to Achaia and publicly debated Jews there, proving from Scripture that Jesus was the Messiah.  Having written all of that, I think I realized why I am feeling the need to write about teaching the Gospel from the Old Testament.  I do not believe that I could do what Paul or Apollos did, proving that Jesus was the Messiah from the Old Testament.  However, reading Acts this year, I am coming to believe that I should be able to do so.  I believe that we should study the Old Testament in order to show how it presents the Gospel and predicts what happened to Jesus.

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

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

I am always drawn to the message Paul delivered while in Athens.  The idea of using logic and reason to make the case for Christ appeals strongly to me, and that is what I see Paul doing in Athens.  He starts with the beliefs expressed by the people of Athens and then argues from there for people to worship and obey Jesus as the Son of God.  According to the account offered her by Luke, it seems to have worked acceptably well.  However, when Paul writes to the Corinthians later, he seems to have felt that his approach in Athens left something to be desired.  Perhaps I am misreading what Paul meant when he told the Corinthians that he did not come to them with eloquence or human wisdom, but, when we consider that he went to Corinth after being “sneered” at by people in Athens, it seems to fit.

Which brings me around to what I learn by reading how Paul preached in Athens.  We need to make the logical case for God.  We need to discuss/argue/debate with people until we find those places where we share common assumptions about how the world works.  From there we can show them how the Gospel has a certain logical cohesion.  However, we must understand that some people will hide behind “logic” as an excuse to reject God.  No matter how good our arguments and our logic, it is only when people are touched by God’s Spirit that they will turn to Him.  While some people in Athens became believers after listening to Paul speak, others out-of-hand rejected the idea that someone might rise from the dead.

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

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

Luke compares the Jews in Berea favorably to those in Thessalonica by saying that they examined the Scriptures daily to see if what Paul was saying was true.  Which should be taken as an example for all of us to follow: when we hear someone speak on a subject, we should read their source material to see if it supports what they are saying. We should especially follow this when someone claims to be communicating a message from God.  Of course that also gives us an example which those claiming to be speaking God’s word should follow: provide sources for what you say God’s message is.

When Jews from Thessalonica arrived in Berea to make trouble, the Believers in Berea sent Paul to Athens while Silas and Timothy remained in Berea.  In Athens, Paul got into a philosophical debate with some philosophers there after which he went on to Corinth.  From  1 Corinthians we learn that Paul changed his approach somewhat after Athens.  Perhaps that is me reading something into that passage from 1 Corinthians, but it has longed seemed to me to indicate that Paul felt chastised by his experience in Athens.  In Athens Paul took the existence of an altar to “an unknown god” to indicate that the Athenians were open to the possibility that their understanding of the divine was incomplete.  So, Paul started his preaching from there, but soon discovered that the Athenians behind that altar were not willing to accept the existence of the supernatural, the possibility that someone might be raised from the dead.  In Athens, Paul tried to win people over with a philosophical argument.  In Corinth, he focused on reaching those who were genuinely seeking, not those who merely sought debate.

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

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

In town after town where Paul and his companions preached the crowds were riled up in an attempt to stop them preaching the Gospel.  I always find it noteworthy that in Berea, when people began agitating the crowds against the Gospel, the Believers sent Paul on his way, while Silas and Timothy stayed behind for some period of time.  From this we realize that Paul was more confrontational than many others.  I would argue that we should learn from this that there is a place in the Church for those who are confrontational about preaching the Gospel and a place for those who take a more gentle approach.

In Athens, while waiting for Silas and Timothy to join him, Paul got into a debate with Epicurean and Stoic philosophers.  These two schools of philosophy were in direct conflict with each other, but both were materialistic philosophies.  That is both schools taught that all beings are entirely material with nothing that was not part of the physical world.  While Paul made some converts in Athens, we know from reading between the lines from his letters to the Corinthian Church that he felt getting into debates with the philosophers was a mistake.  However, I believe that Paul, and certainly Luke, felt that the argument Paul made in Athens concerning the “unknown god” was an important Christian apologetic.  Paul’s argument was that God has revealed Himself to mankind through aspects of the world, that those who truly seek the Truth will find God.  In fact, that is part of the point of Luke including mention of Apollos later in this passage.  Apollos appears to have come to a belief in Jesus from a combination of hearsay and studying Jewish Scripture.  In today’s passage Priscilla and Aquila  introduced Apollos to the Holy Spirit.

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

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

I noticed something interesting today.  Those who opposed Paul and Silas’ teachings formed a mob and started a riot.  Then they went before the city authorities to complain that Paul and Silas were disturbing the city.  We should be alert to people who stir up trouble and then blame it on those they oppose.

Every time I read this little snippet about Apollos I am intrigued.  What exactly did  Luke mean when he said that Apollos only knew John’s baptism?  My understanding of this passage is that Apollos was a disciple of John the Baptist (or of one of John’s disciples), who had heard about Jesus and come to the conclusion that Jesus was the Messiah without having ever heard a Believer preach.  If that is the case, it lends support to what Paul preached in Athens, and later wrote about in some of his letters, that God had revealed Himself through the world around us.  Apollos was able to come to Christ through His study of Jewish Scripture and the stories about Jesus’ teachings which had become common knowledge.

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

Luke intentionally contrasts the reception Paul and Silas received in Berea with that which they received in Thessalonica.  In both cities, Paul used Old Testament scripture to make the case that Jesus was the Messiah.  In Thessalonica, some of the Jews, and many of the God-fearing Gentiles accepted his arguments and became believers.  However, a large fraction of the Jews did not accept his interpretation of the Scripture, and became upset that so many of the Gentiles did.  On the other hand, in Berea the Jews actually read the Scriptures which Paul used in context and even those who  did not agree with him appear to have accepted that his was a valid interpretation.  It was only when the Jews who opposed Paul in Thessalonica got word that he was preaching in Berea that trouble started there.  Trouble and violence seemed to follow Paul around, but this shows that it came from those who would not accept Paul’s arguments but were unable to counter them and felt threatened by those who did accept Paul’s teaching.  We can expect a similar response today.

It was in Athens that Paul realized the limits of using logic to convince people to come to God.  In Athens, Paul tried to start from basic assumptions to make the case for Christ, but, while a small number became believers, most people thought that faith in Jesus was foolishness because they were unwilling to accept that the dead could rise again.  As a result, when he went to Corinth he used a much more experiential approach (some of this understanding comes from what Paul wrote in his letters to the Corinthians).  Instead of spending so much time arguing that the logic of Scripture showed that Jesus was the Messiah, he preached, and demonstrated, that faith in Jesus would bring about a change for the better in our lives.  As a result, those who opposed him were unable to gain any traction with the people or with the authorities.