Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Well, good evening everyone. This is class 5. Actually, I'm sorry. Yeah class 4 of survey of the New Testament and Tonight we are going to be looking at the one History book that we have in the New Testament and that is the book of Acts if you remember the Old Testament breakdown.
As the Old Testament was broken down into five parts. You have law are also known as the Pentateuch. You have the history books. You have the wisdom literature Also known as the poetic books and then you have the prophets Which are broken down into major and.
Minor.
That's our Overview of the Old Testament. The New Testament is broken down similarly, but not the same. The New Testament is broken down first in the Gospels which there are four and. Then the one book of history, which is the book of Acts as we're going to see tonight acts covers about three decades of history in the first century.
And then you have the epistolary works or the epistles and then between those you can distinguish between the Pauline epistles and the general epistles. And then finally we have the book the.
Prophetic book.
One prophetic book in the New Testament, which is the book of Revelation. So that is not to say that there aren't prophecies in other places or anything just like in Matthew. There are prophecies and things but to say the type of literature where we're we're looking here at at forms of literature.
When we do a survey we're looking at the broad picture the big scope sitting on top of the water tower looking down over everything. We survey that's the whole idea. So tonight we have come to the point where we are here.
Last semester we did all this we have spent the last couple of weeks. Looking at the Gospels. We did the synoptic Gospels, which are Matthew Mark and Luke and then last week we did the autopic gospel or the autopic gospel rather, which is the gospel of John and so.
Tonight we're going to look at what we could call the book of Acts or what I like to call Luke.
Part two.
Because Luke is the author of the gospel of Luke and he is the author of the book of Acts which means that the person who wrote the most of The New Testament. Even though Paul wrote the most books Luke wrote the most in in way of breadth.
There's more there's more Greek words in the book of Luke and Acts together Than all the rest of the New Testament combined. So just those two books make up more than half of the of the New Testament.
So that he are up. Here we go. I knew we'd have Late comers, but they're coming doors about to open three two one like magic. Hi, Cory. Hey guys. Anybody else coming? Just you two. I'm glad you're here.
Why don't you pull that door to if there's nobody else's coming? Well, you tell those guys that they're they have an unexcused absence. Then I am listening to Relay the message Cory. I don't know it's unexcused.
All right, so When we look at the book of Luke and we look at the book of Acts we notice them some similarities. It's most specifically they're both addressed to the same person the beginning of the book of Luke and Luke chapter 1 verse 3 says it is to Theophilus and the book of Acts also says that it is to Theophilus this indicates to us the Recipient of the letter and also indicates to us the author because we're.
We're seeing it's written to the same person now. The word Theophilus is interesting because.
Theophilus is a.
Is a proper name. Has it has the prefix Theo? which means God and the Greek word philos which means love and So the word Theophilus means a lover of God one who loves God and In the same way like my son we have it.
We have a child on the way and right now the plan is to name him Theodore. Theodore means gift from God same prefix Theo. But the ending the root is different. So philos meaning love Theophilus.
So.
There is a lot of debate within the community of scholars as to whether or not acts as Our Luke and acts is written to a person or rather the lovers of God meaning the church. So those who love God could be The church that he's writing this to but it could also be an individual Named Theophilus that is in some position of authority and Luke is writing to because it says he says He has compiled all these all this information so as to give him a right account of all that has taken place and So it certainly has the beginning that it reads like a personal letter But there's nothing saying that it's not written specifically to the general church.
I Kind of I'm on the fence about it. I have my own opinions, but they're not you know, I I don't I don't I don't have a I don't have a. A dogmatic approach. All right, so Tonight we're going to look at three things.
And by the way, if you have the syllabus, I know Lance I know tonight's your first night with us I can I can get you a copy before you leave of the syllabus that way. You know what we do each week if you decide you want to start coming regularly.
You'll know what's coming up and this is an eight-week course tonight is week four. So we have four more classes to go and.
And.
Each week we have an outline of what we are to read and what we are to prepare for and Everybody has their their book to read. Yes. You up? Need a syllabus when we take our break at the hour mark. I'll get you both one.
It's right on my computer in there all right, so. Tonight we're going to look at three purposes. We're going to look at or three three Subjects, we're going to look at the authorship and purpose of the book of Acts.
Of course, we've already talked about the author primarily look at the purpose of the book of Acts. Number two We're going to look at theological insights Which we do that each week and then number three, we're going to look at difficulties and controversies.
So that's our outline authorship and purpose theological insights difficulties and controversies. All right in the book introduction to the New Testament by Douglas Moo and da Carson. This phrase is used this quote Acts is a whirlwind tour through three decades of Church history acts as a whirlwind tour of three decades of church history.
The story moves through various areas including Asia Minor Macedonia Greece and Rome and it focuses on two main figures who wants to be the who wants to be the church or not the church the class.
A.
Smarty pants tonight. Tell me who the book of Acts is. Revolving around two two individuals and you can't say Jesus. Of course, it revolves around Jesus, but that's not the answer because I'm thinking of two specific men.
Corey. Who is it?
Yeah, but not in that order, right?
Peter. Paul, right? So the book is centered around two specific ministries now. What's interesting is we we know there are other ministries happening and we get a glimpse such as the ministry of Philip.
And we know the other Apostles are doing things historically. We know like Thomas goes to the east and takes the gospel into India and places like that. So we know that other things are happening, but the book of Acts specifically deals with two primary focal points chapters 1 to 12 is Focused around the ministry of Peter but then beginning around chapter 13 We have somewhat of a shift in focus and it from chapters 13 to 28 There's a focus on the ministry of Paul.
Now again, like I said, that's not to say there aren't other people but these two dominate the story and This makes sense because as we're going to see There is a distinction between Peter and Paul which Paul actually tells us in Galatians Chapter 2 that would make this make a lot of sense.
Can you guys remember off the top of your head? What would make these two key figures? Important to distinguish in early church history. Maybe I'm asking this in a difficult way, but see what you come up with.
Think for a moment and see.
Okay.
What was you gonna say. Yeah, I saw your hand. Well, and we could talk about that in the sense that.
I.
Would say it's the all the Apostles. The Bible says the The. The Bible says the church is built on the foundation of the Apostles and prophets Christ Jesus being the cornerstone. But certainly Peter represented the Apostles but what we do know from Galatians chapter 2 is that Peter had a very specific ministry to the Jews and Paul had a very specific ministry to the Gentiles.
I'll read the passage to you. This is Galatians chapter 2 verses 7 and 8. It says this is Paul writing. He says on the contrary when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised.
Just as Peter has been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised. For he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked through me for mine to the Gentiles. So Paul saw himself as the counterpart to Peter.
Peter had a specific ministry to the circumcised which was the Jews and Paul saw himself as having a specific ministry To the uncircumcised that is the Gentiles now that is not to say that Peter never preached the Gentiles because we know he did in Acts chapter 10 he preaches the Cornelius who is a Gentile and that's not to say that Paul never preached to the Jews because we know that every city he went into he went to the synagogues and he preached in the synagogue so certainly both are true, but According to Paul in Galatians 2 7 and 8.
There's a very specific ministry Given to Peter to the Jews and given to Paul to the Gentiles.
Now.
When we talk about the the purpose of the book of Acts.
Want us to think for a moment about another verse if you have your Bibles turn with me to Acts chapter 1 and verse 8. Years ago. I did a series of teaching through acts and I entitled it. I entitled the series beyond our borders.
Because I believe the book of Acts was about that it was about going beyond the borders of Israel and the gospel going to all the nations and We see this in Acts chapter 1 verse 8 when Jesus is speaking to his apostles and he gives them the missionary commission where he says but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth.
That one verse becomes the theme of the entire book of Acts because that is what we see it begins in Jerusalem and then the church is pushed out of Jerusalem as there begins to be Conflict within the city the church begins to move out into the surrounding area of Judea.
Then it moves into Samaria and we actually see little miniature Pentecost moments where we see the major Pentecost moment happen in Jerusalem. We see little miniature moments of Pentecostal experience where they're experiencing gifts and they're experiencing miracles that are happening in these other places and when the gospel is moving out into these other places, we see God working through the Spirit and Again to the end of the earth.
Where does the book end? It ends in Rome right so all the way from Jerusalem all the way to Rome and it's this story of the Expansion of the power of God through the early work of the Apostles and Sometimes again we We think like the book is about Peter or the book is about Paul.
Really and truly the book of Acts is about the Holy Spirit. Because where the Gospels tell us about the work of Jesus and John 15, what did Jesus say? I go away and I'm gonna send you the Holy Spirit send you to comforter right the pericle a toss the one who will come And walk alongside of you and when he comes He is going to abide with you forever.
And that is a blessed promise that we have as it'll be part of the new covenant that we have the Holy Spirit who abides Within us and he walks within us and he leads us and we see the power of the Holy Spirit.
Building the church from the ground up. Starts out with was it 120 people in the upper room? Then 3 ,000 people get saved in one day at one sermon from the book of Joel of all places Peter preaches 3 ,000 people get saved and then it says and the Spirit was adding to their number daily as People were being saved every day.
People are being saved people are being changed people are being converted by the power of the Spirit so the book of Acts is all about the Spirit and the power of the Spirit. So as one says Matthew Mark Luke and John is the gospel of Jesus.
Acts could be called the gospel of the Spirit the good news. The Spirit has come and has empowered believers and unleashed them upon the world.
We talked about purpose purpose in the book. That was sort of the overview but I want to want to dive in a little further. Because we know we mentioned earlier Luke wrote Acts. Luke writes acts as a historian that's important to understand.
The closest thing we have to a historian and the in the New Testament is Paul is Luke and And then if you if you if you want to say Paul is the church theologian Luke is the church historian. I want to read you a quote now.
I read this quote in a previous class, but I always repeat it for this class because it's important. I read this when we studied the book of Luke. I want to I want to read it again now. This is about William Mitchell Ramsey.
He was Oxford University's first professor of classical art and archaeology and He originally accepted the German scholarly thesis that acts was a second century work that was filled with errors. That was his assumption because that's what he was taught in college.
He announced that he was going to prove that. However research into ancient literature and Research on the ground in Turkey forced him to recognize that acts was actually an accurate report. Written within the first century at dig after dig spanning 15 years.
He accumulated evidence supporting Luke's accounts, but none detracting from them. Overwhelmed by his findings he became a citizen. Our hypothesis is that acts was written by a great historian a writer who set himself to record the facts as they.
Occurred a.
Strong partisan indeed. But raised above partiality by the perfect confidence that he had only to describe the facts as they occurred in Order to make the truth of Christianity and the honor of Paul apparent.
This again was an unbeliever who set out to disprove what the Bible had to say. Instead of disproving it. He himself came to conclude that not only is it true, but it was written by a historian par excellence.
And that is Luke. So this calls into question then. Well, when did Luke write this. And we don't know the answer to that. But we do know a little bit based on what is in it. We know that it came after Paul's house arrest in Rome because that is mentioned in the book.
Some date it after 8070 but anybody who's ever been in my class very long knows that I don't accept that. Because I believe all of the New Testament was written before the year 70.
Here's the thing. I think Luke as a historian Would have certainly included the destruction of Jerusalem. If he was still writing after 8070 occurred the fact that it's not in the book is to me a massive red flag.
So that so that would mean that I believe that that Luke wrote this in the mid 60s and It ends rather abruptly with Paul still alive in Rome, which means That would have been around 62 63 ish maybe. So we're seeing a mid.
60s.
Dating of this writing and it does not give us an account of the death of Paul. Many people find that to be disconcerting because they want to know how Paul died. There is no exact Determination of how the Apostles died their traditions.
There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as we understand that traditions are not scripture and so we can ask the questions and answer them based on what is tradition say and Tradition says that Peter was crucified upside down.
Many people take that as gospel truth. I I think it could be true, but I don't know for certain because again, it's it's it's a traditional understanding of how Peter died. I do believe Peter died as a martyr.
Does that make sense about when he died in the time frame? But Paul was a Roman citizen and one one of the benefits of Roman citizenship was that you did not have to be crucified. Roman citizens were not crucified but they were beheaded and So there is a very good chance that Paul was not crucified but rather that he was beheaded for his faith.
I'll read you a quote from a commentary. It says there are a few different Christian traditions in regards to how Paul died. But the most commonly accepted one comes from the writings of Eusebius. So there is some early church writings.
It's extra biblical and early church historians Eusebius claimed that Paul was beheaded at the order of Roman Emperor Nero or one of his subordinates. Paul's martyrdom occurred shortly after much of Rome burned in a fire an event that Nero blamed on the Christians.
We've heard of this story that Nero had had actually caused the fire himself and used the Christians as a scapegoat that would have made sense as the proper timing for the Death of the Apostle Paul and Eusebius writes and says that's what happened.
So the closest thing we have to a historical record is from a later church. Leader, did you have a question? I'm sorry. I thought I thought I thought your hand went okay. Just thinking okay. The fact that Luke does not mention the death of Paul indicates that he likely wrote prior to that event as I said Giving us a mid -60s date.
Now when it comes to the purpose of acts we have this from the author himself. And if you have your Bibles open just look look again with me at Luke chapter 1. I'm sorry acts. Acts chapter 1 verse 1. He says in the first book O Theophilus I've dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach until the day that he was taken up.
After he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the Apostles whom he had chosen so the writer of Acts Refers to his previous book, which is the gospel of Luke. He says I gave an account about Jesus so his purpose seems to be to provide an orderly account of this same.
In this same way to the early church so acts begins the historical record of 2 ,000 years of church history. By the way, if you take my church history class. Which will probably be the next. I think that's the next class.
Isn't it church history? After we have the new baby, we won't have another class until after the baby's born. The next class will be church history and we actually begin church history. With a short overview of what happens in Acts because Acts begins church history church history begins at Pentecost and explodes from there now one might argue well, the Old Testament is the church, you know, but.
From from the perspective of the New Testament church history begins at Pentecost.
All right.
Let's look at some theological insights. We'll move now to that. You give myself some room on the board.
All right. So in the book of Acts.
We have certainly some theological many theological considerations to make. But here's the most important one I'll write it on the board.
Acts is a.
Bridge.
Acts is a bridge here's what I mean and This is actually in your commentary. If you read your commentary in the introduction to it. This is what it says. Acts is a bridge not only between the life of Christ and the Christ life taught in the epistles but it also is a transitional link between Judaism and Christianity between law and grace.
Acts becomes the bridge between really between two covenants the Old Covenant and The New Covenant. And because acts is historical in nature It does not provide as many direct theological propositions as does the books like Romans or Hebrews.
And That is where the biggest disputes come. I'll throw these two words out there because these two words are very important understanding the difference between.
Prescriptive and.
Descriptive is very important when you are studying the book of Acts. Because many people see what happens in the book of Acts and they say oh That must mean we are supposed to do that and that's the way it's supposed to be for all time.
Therefore prescriptive Rather than saying this is what was happening at the time and therefore it is Descriptive. Here's a good example first entry church. Basically everyone gave their money to the church the church fed the people as Needed and that they were basically living in a communal society.
Why do you think that was? Read the church, but but but. Why do you think the early book of that early parts of acts that that was the way it was handled? Well that even happened after the deacon. We see the deacons beginning about act 6.
Okay. All right. I and and certainly that's true. You kind of getting where I'm where I'm at. Well, that's not. I'm not going there. I'd have to. That might take us down a different road the the simple what I'm looking for is the early Christians were separated from family and from economy from financial security all because of their faith in Christ and.
So what does the church do. It comes together and it supports those in the church and this is everybody. So the church becomes a place where they are supporting one another. Now as we go through the book of Acts, we don't see that in every place.
We don't see communal living in Ephesus necessarily or in Corinth or in places like that. But we do see it in Jerusalem. Why. Because there is a social stigma for following Christ that is dividing families and dividing people from their jobs from their security from their family and the church steps in and becomes the communal protection for these people and feeds them.
In the book Of Acts chapter 6 it tells us that the Hellenistic Jews weren't being fed properly in the daily feeding. What is that? What do we what do we get from that? They were having to feed these people every day.
So they so they picked six men the original deacons, which is what you're talking about Corey because they had to feed them. Now some people take that model and They say that's the way church is supposed to be forever.
Every the church is basically a communistic society and I got to tell you if there's one thing you want to get my goat. Tell me that Christians are supposed to be communists as I might come out my chair.
That is not what the Bible calls us to. Bible does not call us to communism. Karl Marx was nobody's Savior, but he certainly has had many people killed. Here's the thought behind this one thing that we have to understand from the early churches exercise of this Leadership was everything was voluntary.
We know this from the story of Ananias and Sapphira. Because when Ananias and Sapphira sold their property and gave a portion to the church. They didn't give all of it and some people say see it was it was required that they give all.
No it wasn't. Because Peter says specifically in that passage. Your property was yours to do with what you would. You could have sold it or kept it. You could have gave us half the money. You could have given us all the money, but because you lied to the Holy Spirit.
That's why you're condemned not because you didn't give the money but because you lied.
That's right, yeah, yeah, he did didn't he and he said did you sell it for all of this and he said yes. He lied and he says how can you lie to the Holy Spirit? You're lying lying to men. You're lying to God and he dropped dead right there.
By the way, when people talk about being slain in the spirit. That's just be careful what you wish for. Yeah, his Ananias was the first man to be slain in the spirit followed very quickly by his wife.
So the point is not everything in the book of Acts is meant to have an all-time Prescription for the church, but it's descriptive of what is happening at that time. And therefore we. Another good example is that's the issue of tongues.
And we're going to talk more about tongues later because there's only three books of the Bible that talk about tongues Acts 1st Corinthians and a portion of Mark and that's debatable. I kind of hold that up like a half two and a half.
The people who make their arguments Generally that every Christian should speak in tongues and typically these are our Pentecostal friends. The people who make their arguments that every Christian should speak in tongues almost always take the book of Acts as fully prescriptive.
Rather than descriptive. It's telling us what we are to do rather than telling us what they did that that's a big distinction.
Acts.
Represents a transition in time between one covenant and another covenant and Therefore not everything that happens within that transitional period of time is meant to be for all time. Go ahead.
Sure Yes.
I didn't know that but okay. Okay, that makes sense. I'm sure. I'm sure there's also the Mennonites or that rather the Amish are a form of Mennonites are where what we're part of not what we're known as the part of the radical Reformation and it came out of.
It actually I remember correctly came out of the Zwinglian movement, which was he was one of the three major reformers you have Martin Luther John Calvin York Zwingli and the Zwingli followers of Zwingli became the Anabaptists and They became known as the radicals and those radicals.
One of the things that they did not believe in was they did not believe in any type of connection between church and state. Therefore they wouldn't serve in military. They wouldn't serve in any government position things like that.
And that is really what gave birth to and they based it on some of what they see in Acts. But again, there's nothing in Acts that forbids anybody from serving in military or serving in in a position of authority.
In fact, you know, there's there there are times when Paul preaches the gospel to people in authority, you know. So the idea is it does it. I don't agree with their position but I think a lot of it has to do not only from their interpretation of Acts, but also from some of what they were dealing with during the 17th century and 16th 17th century as they were sort of dividing from.
The.
Reformers and becoming their own their own thing and there's a there's a lot more to that but like I said in our history class, I talked about the The original Anabaptist. I really respect a lot of what they were trying to do.
But I think that they they they just went some they just took a few left turns that I wouldn't take went some directions I wouldn't go and one of the ones is that a Christian cannot can ever can can't.
Christians always have to be passive. That's one thing absolute passive passive passive can't serve in any government function can't serve in military. And again the whole communal living thing would be part and parcel of just that whole sort of getting away from.
The whole coming out and be separate they take that as being not engaging with the world. Unless they want to sell a table for $1 ,000. Yeah, I always joke I would say There's a there's a comedian who makes a funny joke.
He visited the Amish and he says, you know I went to the Amish people and I tried to take a picture and they said please don't take a picture because we don't. Want our pictures taken because it makes us feel a sense of pride.
He said no selling a table with no chairs for $1 ,000 makes you feel. He said he said don't tell me you don't feel pride you just told me about that that that that barn you put up in. One day. Yeah, you pretty.
Everybody has pride. They just show it different ways. Sorry didn't mean to go off in it went to the left turn there.
So getting back to the transition between the covenants. So the transitional period if we want to call it that Would have lasted about 40 years. It would have lasted between 30, which was the time that Christ around the time of Christ's Death burial and resurrection to the time of the fall of Jerusalem and that that needs to be understood from a timeline perspective.
If Christ dies around 30, and I know it's 30 to 33 ish and Jerusalem falls in.
70.
That makes a 40 year period. Where the new covenant has already been inaugurated. Understand I'm not saying there's not a new covenant. There is the new covenant is inaugurated in what the blood of Christ, right?
So the new covenant has already come. But there is this transitional point this bridge where there are still people functioning in an old covenant understanding and We know this because remember when Paul is going and he's preaching and he talks about the coming of the Holy Spirit and the people.
That he's preaching to says we don't know anything about the Holy Spirit. We were baptized by John. But we don't know anything about the Holy Spirit. That's because they were still essentially functioning in an old covenant perspective because John was the last Old Testament prophet.
The John the Baptist is the last Old Testament prophet. So those who were essentially Ministered to underneath his ministry were still being ministered to in an old covenant context. Christ comes brings the new covenant and now there's this bridge the book of Acts represents this bridge between the covenants and I would say the final act of God's revelation from the Old Covenant came in 8070 when he brings destruction and I don't believe Jerusalem's ever going to be rebuilt.
By the way, we can have a conversation about that when we get to Revelation. But I don't believe there's going to be another temple. I believe that has been done away with and it's over. I think the next thing on God's prophetic calendar is not the building of another temple, but the coming of Christ.
But that we can debate that another time but that's this is. Ending that administration and we are now under the new covenant.
This transitional period. But oh, by the way, if you want a verse for that Hebrews 8 13 says this in Speaking of a new covenant. He makes the first one obsolete and what is becoming obsolete is growing old and is ready to vanish away.
All right. Now when is Hebrews written? Right around here. What does the new covenant do. According to Hebrews 8 13. Hebrews 8 13 says the new covenant makes the Old Covenant Obsolete and so the Old Covenant is doing what it's getting ready to vanish away.
And when does it vanish away. When the fall of Jerusalem. So there so that's just a verse to kind of bring it all into perspective. Hebrews written in the 60s as well. Yep. Think of it this way during the time of Christ.
And you're in the time of Acts. There's still a temple. There's still sacrifices. There are still people going to the temple annually to have their their celebrations. All of that is still going on that ends.
The coming of Emperor Titus as he does exactly what Jesus said he was going to do. He leaves not one stone left upon another and Jerusalem is cast down. And the Old Covenant is put away. Now what's funny you mentioned Matthew 24 earlier.
I Do believe and maybe this might be a little different from how you guys are interpreting it and we can talk about this another time. I do believe Matthew 24 does prophesy the destruction of Jerusalem.
Jesus talks about the The the. When he says this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Well, what's a generation? According to Jewish teachings 40 years. See a lot of people think Matthew 24 is about his return in the future.
I think this was about the judgment of Jerusalem. If you want more information on that I would encourage you to read the book the last days according to Jesus by RC Sproul. The last days according and that is Available by audiobook if you're one of those people who likes to drive and listen like I do the last days according to Jesus.
RC Sproul gives a very good explanation of Matthew 24 in relationship to revelation and how he understands its Fulfillment in AD 70 this is also known as partial preterism and that is the position that I teach when that comes to the book of Revelation.
Which you'll find out when we get there in a few weeks. All right, so. Once we recognize acts occupies a transitional point in history. Certain things become evident. The signs and wonders which accompany the ministry of the Apostles was not necessarily meant for all times.
This transitional period is marked by miracles which are affirming the Spirit's work. This is why this age is often referred to as the apostolic period. By the way, if you want to look at church history.
Just very briefly. You say the first century? Makes up the apostolic period. The second and third centuries make up what we call the early church or The the we typically the writers from that period are referred to as the early church fathers.
So you'll like you CBS and people like that. They all they're their whole volumes of writings that come from those first two centuries after the church was established. Some of those men who knew the Apostles.
Directly, some of them are disciples directly of the Apostles and we have their writings which is amazing. That we have that most people never read that most people have never looked into that at all.
So the second third century known as the early church fathers then in the fourth century something very important happens. What the conversion or supposed conversion of a man named Constantine, right.
So the marrying of Christianity and the powers and and there is a there is a shift at least in the ability to worship Christ. Legally. Yeah legally and openly so we have in the fourth century the beginning of legal religion legal Christianity and then it becomes.
Well, it becomes required so it goes it goes quickly from being illegal to legal to being required and. Then you get the Roman Empire the Holy.
Roman.
Empire. Which lasts through the Middle Ages you can take this down all the way to the time of the Reformation. This is what is known as the medieval period or the Middle Ages now. I'm glossing a bunch at that point, but you get to the 16th century and What happens a little monk named Martin Luther?
Begins to change the world now. Are there other people in there? Yeah, you've got John Wycliffe John Huss you get up here in 1058. You've got the schism between the East Church and the Western Church you go a little further you talk about the introduction of Islam and how that changed the church and how things began to happen with Things like the Crusades and the Inquisition.
There's a lot in there that I left out. But the point is you see this period here is called the apostolic period. That's the book of Acts. That's that that's how that relates to everything else and that's a unique period in history.
People ask me sometimes. Why do you think there were only miracles then because I think this is a unique period in history. I'm not saying miracles don't happen now, but the time of signs and wonders and miracles.
Accompanied the Apostles they had the signs of the Apostles and I don't think that this is why there's a new group out there. You've probably heard of NAR. NAR is the new apostolic Reformation and this is a group of hyper-pentecostals who believe that they are the new Apostles and that they're having a reformation of gifts and they have the ability to raise the dead and heal the blind and all that.
They're not doing it. But they're saying they're doing it and they're not if anybody was out there raising the dead or healing the blind or anybody else. He'd be the most famous person in the world and it just ain't happening.
Well there yeah and it would there would be a lot that we would have to consider when it comes to. If we did see somebody that had supernatural gifts we know in the not that. Not that I want to get revelation right now, but in Revelation it does talk about the the beast and being able to do miraculous things.
So yeah. So, like I said getting I do believe that there's something unique about the apostolic period and about the time the Apostles lived. That they had unique abilities. And we see that not only in not only in Things like the gift of tongues, but in the gifts of healing.
I mean, what was it? Paul was preaching to a man fell out a window and he raised him from the dead and Everybody was like, yeah, that's normal. No, it's not normal. It was it is not normal. None of the things that were happening were run-of-the-mill.
All right, so I want to give you just a few extra theological insights. You may want to write these down if you. You don't have to you don't have to write them word for word, but just a few thoughts we do have a picture of early church worship in Acts chapter 2 verses 42 to 47 a picture of early church worship and.
Acts 2.
42 to 47. In fact, I love that passage because it talks about how the church worshiped how in fact, let's just look at it. Go to Acts 2 42 to 47 it says in verse 42 and they devoted themselves to the Apostles teaching and the Fellowship to the breaking of bread and prayers and all came upon every soul.
Many wonders and signs were being done through the Apostles and all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all as any had need.
So we talked about earlier and day by day attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes. They received their food and glad with glad and generous hearts. Praising God and having favor with all the people and the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
So we see a picture of early church worship. It was daily. They were worshiping together. Isn't it sad and I don't want to break off into a sermon here, but in it's sad that in 2022 we have to beg people to come to church once a week and we have to hope and pray that people are actually going to get out of their house and go to church and There in the first century they were gathering daily to worship.
They had been changed. We also see a transition. I'm not going to read every verse, but I'll give you a few. I'll give you what to write down. We see a transition from the Sabbath to the Lord's Day. We see this in Acts chapter 20 verse 7 and in 1st Corinthians 16 to.
Where they were meeting not on the Sabbath day, but they were having their their Special meeting time even though they were worshiping daily. They were having a meeting time on the Lord's Day. Now, why do we call it the Lord's Day?
Sunday, but it's also something something significant happened on that day.
Resurrection.
Right keep this in mind. Old Covenant. New Covenant. The Old Covenant is commemorated on the seventh day with a resting from work. Which celebrates what God's creation where he rested from his works? The New Covenant is celebrated on the first day of the week because Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week.
That is the that is the distinction between the two we. I've heard people say we should worship on Saturday because that's the Sabbath. Yes, that is the Sabbath but that is not where Christians have ever worshipped and that's not where we're called to worship and The seventh-day Adventist get mad at me when I say that but they got to get in line.
I got a lot more people mad at me than them, but the idea of meeting on Saturday. To fulfill the Old Covenant law is again going back under this and we're not there anymore. The Old Covenant has been made what?
Obsolete. And we are part of a New Covenant with a new day. When we got new everything we have a new sign of entrance. The Old Covenant had circumcision we have baptism. We have a new feast the Old Covenant had the Passover.
We have the Lord's Supper. They had a different day. They had the Sabbath we have the Lord's Day. All of those things were seeds. Circumcision was a seed circumcision of the heart which represented regeneration.
Which would come in the New Covenant and we picture that in baptism. The Passover was a seed which represented the Israelites being delivered from Egypt. Later Jesus would take the bread in the cup and he said this is my body.
This is my blood and it represents what not deliverance from Egypt, but for deliverance from sin. The seed becomes the fruit in the New Covenant. The same with the Sabbath and the Lord's Day. Now are there genetic connections between the Sabbath and Lord's Day?
Yes. But they're not the same. I did a debate on this by the way. That's why I get a little get a little excited about. I did a two and a half hour debate with the Presbyterian. Over why Sunday is not the Sabbath.
It's the Lord's Day and there is a difference because I do believe there is a difference.
We see the first Christian martyr Acts chapter 7 who is who. Who's first Christian martyr? Stephen that's right. We see the loosening of dietary restrictions in Acts chapter 10. Which everybody like me who enjoys their weekly pork sandwich will give a hearty.
Amen. Because the dietary restrictions were loosened by the way. The book of Mark actually tells us Jesus made all foods clean and that was recognized by Peter in Acts chapter 10, but it doesn't say Peter made the foods clean.
It says Jesus did. We also see the first use of the word Christian in the book of Acts. It is in Acts chapter 11 verse 26, and it was a derisive term. Acts 11 26 it says they were first called Christians at Antioch and The word Christian there was a basically like an insulting term saying they believe they were little Christ's.
Yeah, yeah. That's not to say that we shouldn't call ourselves Christians, but just understanding the history of the term. We also see the conversion of one of God's greatest enemies in Acts chapter 9 Saul of Tarsus.
Saul was an enemy of the church and God converted him. Demonstrating to us the theological principle of election. Because Paul did not choose Christ as many people say you have to choose Christ. No. Christ chose him.
Christ blinded him and Christ saved him in a lot of ways without his approval. Without asking him anything. He just simply intervened in his life.
He went on to become the greatest missionary. And I would say Outside of Jesus Christ the greatest preacher the church has ever had. Last before we take our break. Interesting theological note. The word love is never used in the book of Acts as much as we talk about the love of God and the love of neighbor.
And. How Christ has called us to love one another and to love our enemies? The book of Acts never once uses any of the Greek forms of the word for love. John uses it dozens of times. But it is not included in Luke and I believe this tells us something about modern evangelistic methods.
Because what is the book of Acts? It's the spreading of the gospel. It's the spreading of the church. It's going out into the world and the modern evangelistic method is to go tell everyone Jesus loves you and has a wonderful plan for your Life, that's the way we're supposed to evangelize.
That's not the way the early church evangelized. The early church evangelized by calling people to repentance and faith. To turn from your sin and turn to the only one who can save you. Act 17 actually should be our example for evangelism because Paul goes into the midst of the philosophers literally into the belly of the beast and he says this God whom you do not know.
I Proclaim to you today and this God tells every man everywhere to repent. He's called all men everywhere to repent. So does that mean there's no love in Acts? No, there's love all over actually just the word is not there and it's interesting when we consider modern evangelistic methods.
All right, we're gonna go ahead. No, no, no. Let me I actually said it wrong. God commands all men everywhere to repent and that is what the text says act 17. The point is this God does command all men to repent.
But no man is able to repent unless he is enabled by the Spirit by the Spirit. And so you say was it fair for God to command some command a man to do something that he cannot do. God is not keeping him from being able to do it.
And this is this is an issue of when we talk about Calvinism understanding that the inability of man. The inability of man isn't it is a lack of desire. He doesn't want to come. The unbeliever does not want to come and the only thing that would cause the unbeliever to want to come Is the Spirit of God that draws him in?
Yeah. All right. So let us take a five-minute break go use the restroom. We had Alan and Nancy have done the whole two years and did every paper and everything and you know, so We're on our we're on our third year of the Academy so.
All right. We're going to finish the book tonight the book of Acts with the last 20 to 25 minutes by looking at difficulties and controversies. Because acts is a unique Historical work with no others containing the same material.
We don't have the same issues of harmonization that we did with the Gospels. Remember when we talked about the Gospels. We said some of the hard part of interpreting the Gospels as you have four Gospels which gives us four pictures of Jesus's life and Sometimes some of those pictures intersect and there seems to be some differences and you have to harmonize those differences.
We don't believe there's contradictions. But we have to have to deal with you know. One says there was two demoniacs one says there was one. One says the man's daughter had died. The other says she was still alive, you know, there's things where we have to deal with that.
We talked about that a lot in those classes. The book of Acts we don't have the same problem because there's only one book of Acts. We don't have four books of Acts like we have four Gospels but what we do have is.
We do have some events that are mentioned in other books that we have to harmonize and probably. The one that is the most Relevant is the book of Galatians. Galatians is the first letter written by Paul and it was probably One of the first letters of the New Testament that was written.
I would say it's the second. I think the book of James came first, but Galatians would have been shortly thereafter.
Paul recounts his life in Galatians and he mentions things that are not in the book of Acts. That again is not a contradiction. But it is an omission by Luke. Luke does not give us a full biography of Paul.
He doesn't intend to. But understand. There is a portion that seems to have some Relevant crossover and I'll let you look at both and you can kind of get the idea of what I'm saying. I'm turning your Bibles to Galatians 1.
Actually, I'm gonna have two people read Billy Ray. Would you read Galatians 1 15 to 18 and Lance. Would you read Acts 9 18 to 26. We're gonna start with Galatians. Yep Galatians 1. Look we'll let everybody get their Galatians 1 15 to 18.
Go ahead.
They've called me by his grace. Was pleased to reveal his son to me in order that that I might preach Him among the Gentiles. I did not immediately consult with anyone. Nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me.
But I went into Arabia and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him 15 days.
I'm writing it down in.
The book of Galatians Paul accounts it this way. He says after I got saved I went to Arabia and then Damascus. It was three years and I went to Jerusalem. Right. That's what he just read now. Lance if you would read Acts chapter 9 beginning at 18 to 26.
Or with and When he had Received me he was strengthened then was saw certain days with the disciples with Disciples which were at Damascus. Okay, and straightaway he preached Christ in synagogues and he he is the Son of God, but all They heard him That all that heard him were amazed and said is.
Not.
This he. This not this he had. Destroyed them which called on his name in Jerusalem and came hither for.
That.
Intended that he might bring them both into the chief priests. But Saul Increased insisted the Increased it more in strength and which well at the basket provide proving that this is.
Very.
After that many days Were fulfilled. The Jews took counsel to kill him But they laid away They laid awake what is known as Saul and they waited at the gate. They like to kill him.
Then.
They.
Then the disciples took him by night and let him down by the wall of the basket and When Saul was come Saul was come to Jerusalem. He joined himself to the Disciples, but they were all afraid of him and believed not that he was in sight.
But.
Barnabas took him and both him. And brought him to the apostles and declared to them how he had seen the Lord in the way that he Spoken to him and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus.
Awesome. Thank you. So in that account We don't hear about Arabia at all. We hear. By the way, I said this is Galatians. This is axe and axe it says he was baptized. That was after the scales fell off his eyes.
He was baptized after a certain number of days. He was in Damascus and then the next we see it again the term many days. Certain days and main days both youth and it says he began to stir up a problem in Damascus.
They let him down in a basket through a wall and he went to where? Jerusalem so. What axe gives us in like eight verses is Actually several years according to the book of Galatians. That's the part that has to be harmonized because we are told he is three years in Damascus.
And that's after he's gone to Arabia. I Always call this Paul seminary training. Because we don't know what was going on when he went to Arabia. We don't know what was going on during that three-year period but we could Conjecture this and stay with me because again it is conjecture.
This is opinion and opinions are like, you know Nostrils, we all have them and they all smell. The Apostles who walked with Jesus walked with Jesus for three years. The moment they met Jesus to the moment of the death burial and resurrection.
They were with him for three years. Paul didn't have that. But after Paul gets saved according to the book of Galatians, he spent three years Doing what he doesn't tell us. Could it be that he is being ministered to and being trained in the same way the Apostles were possibly?
Maybe in a way that was supernatural. Maybe in a way that was spiritual that we don't know and again I'm conjecturing some the idea is there's a three-year missing period in here and it's right here.
It literally is defined as many days how many days that many. So that's what has to be harmonized between Galatians and Acts because we don't have another book of Acts to harmonize. But we'd have Paul's own narrative of his life and his narrative is I went from Arabia to Damascus.
I spent three years and then I went to Jerusalem here as I was baptized. Nothing is mentioned about Arabia. Damascus is mentioned and it's surrounded by the concept of many days. Then he's let down in a basket then he goes to Jerusalem.
So the same thing is happening. But from what it's being telescope. The story is being Expanded in Galatians. So that has to be harmonized. That's that's one another thing that has to be harmonized is Paul's own account of his of his Conversion because in Acts chapter 9 Verse 7 it says that the men who were with him heard a voice, but they saw no one.
But in Acts 22 when Paul is recounting the same story. It says they heard not a voice and So the the the argument of contradiction comes up did they hear a voice or did they not hear a voice? Because again, I'll read it to you.
Acts 9 7 says this and the man which journeyed with him stood speechless hearing a voice. But seeing no man, that's Acts 9 7 but Acts 22. Paul is recounting the story and he says this he says and they that were with Me saw indeed the light and they were afraid but they heard not the voice of him that spake unto me.
So Is this a contradiction? Go ahead Cory. That's right. The terms that are being used here in the Greek is the difference between hearing and understanding so it's obvious the men heard something but they did not understand what they were hearing and That's what that's the way that I've always understood it.
And I think that's the correct way is that when Paul is speaking in Acts 22 about what happened. He says those men didn't hear it in the sense that they didn't understand. What was being set stated? Yes.
Yeah, that's a different that's a different book, but yes that.
Don't think I I think that's a different. I Don't. I've never heard those two put together. I'd have to I'd have to look into that more. I've never heard anybody say that the calling up to the third heaven was this conversion experience.
I'd have to look into that further and I it's interesting. I never heard that as a as a potential understanding of that.
Don't know that I would put those two together, but that's interesting thought I just. I've never I've never thought of connecting those.
So as I was saying These are the types of difficulties that we have to look at because we're looking at a book of history that's giving us historical information and sometimes the question of how these historical accounts line up become the The point that we are having to study and having to determine.
But the most important thing as I've said from everything tonight. And this is where I will begin to draw to a close. The most important thing that we have to understand about the book of Acts is that it is a bridge.
It is a transitional work. It takes us from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant and We see this modeled in the transitions that were made by the people involved. Common men became empowered evangelists.
Fishermen became a pot apostolic guides. A hater of the church becomes its most powerful ally. All of this is transitional. All of this is change. Acts is about a great period of transition. Jesus told his disciples this transition would come in John 16 7.
He says I tell you the truth it is of advantage of you it is it is to your advantage that I go away. Or if I do not go away the Comforter or the helper the paraclete will not come to you. But if I go I will send him to you.
Acts is the fulfillment of that promise. Jesus said if I go away, I will send you the Holy Spirit. And acts fulfills Jesus's promise. I want to read to you a quote from John MacArthur as the first work of church history ever penned.
Acts records the initial response to the Great Commission. It Provides information on the first three decades of the church's existence. Material found nowhere else in the New Testament. Though not primarily a doctrinal work acts nonetheless Emphasizes that Jesus of Nazareth was Israel's long-awaited Messiah shows that the gospel is offered to all men not merely the Jewish people and Stresses the work of the Holy Spirit mentioned more than 50 times.
I want to stop the quote for a minute. Remember earlier? I said there's one word not used in acts. That's the word love. Love is never used in acts, but the Holy Spirit is mentioned over 50 times. Acts also makes frequent use of the Old Testament.
Acts abounds with transitions from the ministry of Jesus to that of the apostles from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. From Israel as God's witness nation to the church comprised of both Jew and Gentile as God's witness people.
The book of Hebrews sets forth the theology of the transition from the Old Covenant to the New and acts depicts the New Covenant's practice outworking in the life of the church. Hebrews tells us what the New Covenant is how it replaces the Old Covenant and makes it obsolete.
And acts shows us the transitional point of what that looked like. The book of Acts is a bridge and it's going to take us to our next portion of study as We gather again next week. We're going to begin a two-part or two class Study on the writings of the Apostle Paul.
We're going to look next week at.
Believe we do Romans 1st 2nd Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians, I think we do to Colossians next week, but I'll I'll look at you. It's in your notes. What does the note say? It's in the syllabus Romans 2 Colossians.
I was right. Okay. I like being right. All right, so next week we are going to do Romans 2 Colossians. The syllabus tells you what you need to read. Don't forget to do your reading that will help you be able to participate in class.
Any any questions? Yes, sir.
Actually, but right there in Galatians that three years.
Could be yeah. Yeah, absolutely. What you erased.
For centuries starting at. I mean, I I'm doing my homework in Daniel. And that's the statue isn't it? That iron starts right there about the fourth century. The length of iron that.
That's but that's 4th century BC, so I would I would Interpret that a little differently because Daniel actually gives us the interpretation. He tells us the gold is Nebuchadnezzar. That's Babylon this this this well the silver is the Meat of Persians and then after that is the Grecian and then the Romans.
All of that took place before the coming of Christ. So that would have all been before Christ. Yeah, but that doesn't but that's not the fulfillment of that prophecy the prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar and X or in Daniel 4 I think it is Daniel 3 Daniel 4 where he talks about the statue and what he saw that was that was actually building to the the time of The Romans which is which is who were in power when Christ comes so that's after the Medes and the Persians that goes from the Babylonians the Medes the Persians the.
Greeks and then the Romans, so I do believe we're in the times of the Gentiles. That's from Romans chapter 11 when it talks about the times of the Gentiles. But that's not connect. I wouldn't connect that to the Daniel to the Daniel prophecy.
I see I see. All right guys anybody else All right. Well, let's pray. Father God, I thank you for your word and for your truth. I pray Lord that this has been useful. If nothing else Lord for us to see that you have always been in work in history.
Especially in the work of bringing about your transitions from one to the other. Transitioning from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Lord. We are so grateful to be New Covenant believers. Because Lord as we are in the New Covenant, we have the benefits and blessings of looking back to what Christ has done.
Not having to look forward and waiting but Lord having looking back and saying we know what was done for us. Our Savior has died for us and we do look forward to his coming. But with the expectation that when he comes.
The work for our sin has already be taken place. And we have a Savior and we are thankful for that Savior. We're thankful for the Holy Spirit who indwells us who now goes out into the world and I pray Lord that we would be used of you by the power of your spirit to reach men and women for Christ in Jesus name.
Amen.