Acts 1: In the beginning

Note:  Since this is the first blog post in the new format I will include a brief description of each section.  The descriptions are in italics.  

Scripture Reading: Acts 1
This is the main scripture we are reading from.  I encourage you to read it yourself before continuing with the blog post.  I have linked the King James Version, but I am not married to it.  If you find the King James Version hard to understand I recommend starting with the NIV or the ESV.  You can come back to the KJV if you so choose.


Synopsis:
This is just a quick recap of the main text.  

This is the beginning of Christianity as we now know it to be.  Jesus has come and through his death, burial, and resurrection has fulfilled The Law.  Because of this, God's believers are no longer waiting on the coming of the Messiah, but the return of the Messiah.  Jesus instructed his followers to stay in Jerusalem as they waited to receive the Holy Spirit.  Jesus then ascended into heaven and two men, dressed in white, again promised that Jesus would return the same way he left.

During a time of Prayer Peter stood and instructed the followers that they should choose a successor to Judas based on Psalm 69:25 being fulfilled in order to fulfill Psalm 109:8.  Peter speaks about the qualifications of an apostle the disciples gave lots (a game of chance) and chose Mattias over Joseph.

Teaching Points:

These are the points that I choose to highlight.  Please DO NOT restrict your understanding of this passage to my teaching points.  I encourage you to develop and share you own.  I assure you that I read every comment.  Not only do I welcome discussion; I hope to encourage it.

Choosing of an Apostle

In the bible there were two types of apostles.  There were Jesus' 12 disciples who later became the major apostles, and there were a host of minor apostles; most notably Paul and Barnabas.  What is interesting is that the bible gives us specific qualifications for elders and deacons in I Timothy 3.  In Acts 1:2 the bible tells us that apostles are chosen while I Timothy 3:1 the first step to becoming an elder is a desire.  Specifically put, the steps to becoming an apostle originates as a choice from God while eldership originates as a desire from man.  Even the title apostle is purposely vague as it is literally translated "one who is sent."

So in today's church hierarchy, I'm left wondering how people are granted the title of apostle.  I've been told that it is based on the study of the works of Paul, and the inference to what his roles were in the church body.  In Acts 1:22 Peter qualifies that Judas' replacement had to have been witness of Jesus' ministry from baptism through death, but the group prayed and casted lots in an effort to leave the decision up to God.  Even Paul, who doesn't specifically fit the criteria for a major apostle, was called on his road to Damascus in Acts 9.  Being that the bible is specific on the criteria of elders and deacons, but vague on everything dealing with apostles, I question the process by which men ordain other men as apostles.  I don't believe God gave us the work of the apostles so that we can infer and ordain more apostles.  We can make the point that through the written New Testament, we have the work of the apostles even though we don't have the people themselves.

Remember Jesus

As this passage wraps up Jesus' time on earth it reiterates three major tenants of Christianity.  Acts 1:2-3 reiterates first that Jesus was performing the work of the Holy Spirit.  During his life on earth Jesus left no grey area as to who he was.  The bible does not paint Jesus as simply a good man, or a human prophet.  In the Gospels Jesus was touted as God's son (John 3:16).  Not simply a child of God like Christians, but God's ONLY BEGOTTEN son.  Jesus declared himself that he and the Father are one (John 10:30), and that he is the only way to the father (John 14:6).

The second thing confirmed in Acts 1:2-3 was that Jesus did die, and did return after dying.  In the KJV it says that he showed himself alive after his passion.  That means that he died but returned to give proof after his death that he was no longer dead.  In John 3:14-16 we see that Jesus is lifted up as the Son of Man which refers to his public crucifixion, but in verse 16 he is salvation to those that believe as the Son of God.  This passage of scripture once again confirms that Jesus died, rose again, and walked the earth for 40 days to offer proof that he had conquered death.    

The last tenant of Christianity reiterated in this passage is that Jesus will again return.  In verse 8 he tells them that the Holy Ghost will come upon them, a reminder that he had promised them a comforter in John 14:6.  Then Jesus ascended into heaven as the disciples watched.  After he had ascended, two men dressed in white reminded them that Jesus was to return in the same manner they just saw him leave.

One thing worth noting when the Bible talks of Jesus' return is it always speaks of it as though it is soon to come.  Everyone who heard the words of Jesus first hand, who heard his promise to return is dead.  So the message of Christ's return was spoken to them, but intended for us as subsequent generations.  Roughly 2,000 years have passed since Jesus ascended in heaven.  Even though Jesus admitted that he did not know when he would return (Mark 13:32), his return was never spoken of as something to eventually come to pass.  While I don't believe that the bible has given us clues to figure out the date and the time of Christ's return I do believe it is portrayed as imminent in order that we as Christians stay on guard; knowing that there is always a possibility that today is that day.  I believe the message to non-believers is that tomorrow may be too late to repent.

Next Level Question
This is an open ended discussion question based on the text.  It is designed to promote critical thought and discussion; NOT DISSENSION AND ARGUMENT.

In Acts 1:15-26 Peter initiates the choosing of Judas' replacement.  That initiation ends in Matthias becoming a new apostle.  After Acts 1 we never again hear from Matthias.  At the same time, most of the New Testament is penned by Paul in an effort to be a witness as Jesus described in Acts 1:8.  Despite that and the fact that Paul was both chosen by Jesus on his way to Damascus and bought up to Heaven (2 Corinthians 12), he was never seen as a major apostle the way Judas would have been.  The question is; who was the replacement David referred to in Psalms 109:8?  Was it Paul and Peter jumped the gun?  Or was it Matthias and Paul's ministry was unrelated to David's prophesy?  

God's words vs. My Words

I'm not a big fan of topical preaching.  I do feel like there are times when topical preaching is appropriate.  Sometimes a guest preacher doesn't have the time to expound on an entire passage of scripture and needs to pick a topic and speak on it.  Other times a preacher needs to address a specific event or happening and a topical message is the best way to approach it.  So while I do think there are times where topical preaching is more than appropriate, I think topical preaching can also be dangerous and ineffective.

The most obvious danger is a preacher being married to the topic as opposed to the scriptures.  Contrary to what many believe, not every word spoken by a clergy member is gospel and not every message presented from a pulpit is of God.  Many current day scriptural misinterpretations are rooted in topical preaching, strengthened through tradition, and justified with bible verses taken out of context.  This often happens because a preacher, tied to a topic, bends the Word of God to conform to his topic as opposed to transforming his thinking to fall in line with the scriptures.

I say that topical preaching can also be ineffective because it can hinder the work of The Spirit.  The Word of God is eternal (Psalms 119:89) but our lives are fleeting (1 Peter 1:24-25).  So when we try to support our temporary ideas and ideals with God's everlasting truth we disadvantageously constrict God's truth's to our experience.  What I mean by that is that the word of God has the ability to separate us from our most carnal misconceptions (Hebrews 4:12).  When preached, read, or studied, a passage of scripture can affect a congregation of believers in a multitude of ways.  Topical preaching dilutes the Spirit's work providing understanding as a means to application.

I discussed this once with a church elder who agreed with me, but said that topical preaching was necessary because most people in church have a disconnect between a preached message and applying that message to their lives.  I understood the point he was attempting to make, but I still disagreed that it justified topical preaching.  I still believe that to be the work of The Spirit, even if it doesn't happen on the preacher's time table.  Moreover, the scriptures are written in such a way that the words can be interpreted differently based on life experience.  Any of us who have studied have been marveled at God showing us something new in a passage of scripture we've already read.

With that said, I will begin using this blog to study complete passages of scripture in their context.  I will begin with the book of Acts.  It is my prayer that readers will feel confident to leave observations, questions, and answers in the comments field.  It is my prayer that no one feel intimidated and that we will all see this as a venture to learn.  Hopefully, this will allow us to sharpen our iron with the iron of others.

As I said, we will be starting in the book of Acts.  May God bless our journey.