Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, June 30, 2013 Read – Acts 10:9-23a The scene now shifts to Joppa where Peter is staying. Luke had conveniently brought Peter to this place where he is more accessible to Cornelius – the truth is God had brought Peter to this place. The occasion is a time of prayer – Peter goes up on the roof of Simon’s house for a time of seclusion with God in prayer. He is soon overcome with a deep hunger. While the food is being prepared Luke tells us that Peter enters into a deep “trance” – are we to understand “trances” as being the same thing as “visions” or “appearances?” Luke really does not distinguish and it is likely that all three are meant to be synonymous with one another. In his trance, Peter sees a strange sight. A large sheet comes down from heaven filled with all kinds of animals – some are clean but many are unclean. Peter receives the command to kill and eat. As a good Jew, Peter refuses. We are reminded of Ezekiel who was commanded by God to make his bread on a fire using human dung – he refuses too because to do so would have been to become unclean. God allows Ezekiel to use cow dung (Ezekiel 4:1-17). The sheet is lowered and raised three times which adds emphasis to the story. We have noticed before that repetitions of three are a technique gospel writers use to provide emphasis. We are never told whether or not Peter actually obeys the word and eats the animals. In actuality, as we will see, the story is not really about eating or not eating food. If one were to guess, it is likely that Peter never does eat the unclean animals. The words that Peter hears are what is important – “What God has made clean you must not call profane” (Acts 10:15). The episode ends with Peter being greatly puzzled (Acts 10:17). In good storytelling technique, at just this moment the messengers from Cornelius arrive at the door of the house Peter is staying. While Peter is puzzling over the meaning the vision he had during the trance the Spirit tells Peter to go down into the house because three men are looking for him. The voice of the Spirit is not part of the trance – once again we are left to ponder just how God speaks. How do we know it was the Spirit? How does Peter know? Once again it is faith that must decide. When Peter encounters the messengers from Cornelius, having heard the Spirit’s command, Peter crosses the first of many barriers that are shattered in this story – he welcomes these Gentiles into the house! What else was he to do? The Spirit had spoken – the trance with its vision of the animals in the sheet was still swimming in his mind. Readers of the book of Acts can anticipate that there is much more coming in this story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, June 29, 2013 Read – Acts 10:1-8 The story of Peter and Cornelius is a watershed story in the book of Acts and in the story of the church. The story of the mission of God’s people to the Jewish people of Jerusalem and all Judea, and with it the mission to the Samaritans lies now in the past, in the background of the story. We can be certain that the mission to the Jewish people continued and the point here is certainly not that this first mission was complete. But the mission to the Jewish people is in the past with regard to Luke’s story. It will be important that we do not forget this mission. Without it the second mission could and would never have happened. But a new day is dawning as we begin to read Acts 10. We noticed that the story of Saul on the Damascus Road was an important story because Luke tells it three times – this story is also important and Luke repeats it twice and refers to it later. Because Luke tells the story twice in a short span of time makes reading the book of Acts a bit tedious at this point – however originally the story would have been heard orally since most people did not read and an oral experience of this story is far from tedious. What makes this story a watershed story and so crucial in the structure of the book of Acts is that Cornelius is a Gentile. So far everyone who has become a believer in the story is Jewish. The one possible exception is the Ethiopian eunuch, but Luke slips by that by leaving his race ambiguous and it is the fact that he is a eunuch that rises to importance. Here, it is abundantly clear that Cornelius is a Gentile – a Roman soldier at that! While he is pictured as a God-fearing man and devout he is certainly not to be thought of as a proselyte. The line of demarcation between Jews and Gentiles is crystal clear in the OT scripture. By this time in history the rules about conduct between Jews and Gentiles were even more strict and hardened. Jews would not eat with Gentiles, nor enter their houses or welcome them into their Jewish house. To do so would have been to become contaminated spiritually. We cannot stress enough how terribly difficult it was to cross the barrier between Jews and Gentiles. Even Jesus seems to respect this barrier – the command to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel is clear. The story of the Canaanite woman who pleads with Jesus to receive even the crumbs that fall from the table is witness to how firm this barrier was (Mark 7:24-30). It is significant and peculiar that Luke omitted that story from Mark – perhaps he was looking forward to the story he would tell in the book of Acts. The story begins with God sending an angel to the Gentile, Cornelius. God makes the first move! That is an important thing for us to notice in this story. Luke tells us Cornelius sees this angel in a vision – just as Ananias had been told by God in a vision to go and pray for Saul. Cornelius provides a perfect first venture across the barrier since he is so devout – he sounds almost like Zechariah and Elizabeth, Simeon, and Anna. So the story is engaged and God has taken the first step. Cornelius is to send for Peter.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, June 28, 2013 Read – Acts 9:36-43 The last story that Luke relates in his story of the mission of God’s people to the Jewish world is a peculiar and delightful story. Many have noticed that this story parallels a similar story in the gospels about Jesus healing the daughter of Jairus (Luke 8:40-56). In the story of Jairus’ daughter a desperate father sends for Jesus to help. Here those who love Dorcas send for Peter to help. In both cases by the time the helper arrives the person has died. There is weeping and wailing going on as Jesus and Peter arrive at the place of need. Just as Jesus put everyone outside, Peter puts everyone outside too. The words of Jesus to the child are “Talitha Cumi” and Peter’s words to Dorcas (her Aramaic name is Tabitha) are “Tabitha Cumi”. The dead person is restored to life and joyful celebration can begin. This story, like the story of the raising of Jairus’ daughter, may also have connections to similar stories about Elijah and Elisha each raising a widow’s son (1 Kings 17:17-24 and 2 Kings 4:32-37). All of these stories speak of the compassion of God for God’s people. The last thing this little story does is to move Peter to the home of Simon, a tanner, who lives in Joppa. It is from this location that a major watershed event unfolds.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, June 27, 2013 Read – Acts 9:32-35 The next two brief stories provide a transition for Luke to the next major section of his book. They help to move Peter from Jerusalem to the edges of Jewish territory. Peter is pictured by Luke something like a bishop – moving here and there overseeing the ministry of the church in Judea. The center of the church may be Jerusalem, but clearly Peter is the prime leader. The little story about the healing of Aeneas does two things – first of all it emphasizes again that it is Jesus who heals, not Peter (Acts 9:34) and secondly it tells once again of the growth in believer (Acts 9:35). Luke has not provided a number since he said there were about 5000 believers (Acts 4:4). As we read Luke’s story we get the impression that the group must easily have doubled by now. Luke’s point all along is to emphasize that there were those within Judaism who did receive Jesus and welcomed the visitation of God to his people. Luke will not permit his readers to come to the wrong conclusion – that Israel as a whole has been rejected by God and that now God has turned to Gentiles. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, June 26, 2013 Read – Acts 9:26-31 We have already begun to talk about Saul’s visit to Jerusalem from a historical point of view yesterday. We do not need to talk about that again. Our focus can be on Luke’s story. He tells us that Saul came to Jerusalem attempting to join the disciples there. Understandably they were very much afraid of Saul. After all he had been chief among the persecutors. Luke now reintroduces us to a character he had mentioned earlier (Acts 4:36). Luke does have a creative way of foreshadowing things as he tells his story. Just as Paul was introduced at the time of Stephen’s martyrdom and then reintroduced on the Damascus Road, Barnabas was introduced as the good example of how to deal with possession and in now reintroduced as the one who bridged the gap between Saul and the Jerusalem leaders. Luke tells us that Barnabas was successful in advocating for Saul and that he spent some time in open fellowship with the believers in Jerusalem until an attempt on his life led them to send him off to Tarsus. Luke pictures Saul in a subservient role – the Apostles are predominant in the story. The story of Saul’s transformation from a persecuting Jew who does not believe in Jesus to a believing Jew comes to a conclusion with Saul being sent away to Tarsus. And on that note, Luke brings to a conclusion his story of the ministry within Jerusalem. The story ends on a positive note – the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experiences a time of peace. The persecution perpetrated by the ministry of Stephen is over. And, Luke does not miss an opportunity to remind his readers that the Jewish believers continue to increase in number.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, June 25, 2013 Read – Acts 9:19b-25 The experience of Saul on the Damascus Road is often referred to as the conversion of Saul. Luke would find this description to be very offensive. Saul does not change religion!! His understanding of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God, changed but Paul remains just as much a Jew after this experience as before. Luke remains insistent that Christianity is Judaism in its fullest form. It is always important for us to remember this as well – without Judaism as the foundation, Christianity crumbles. Perhaps one way to think about this is to recognize that Christianity is a form of Judaism – that is the only way in which Luke thought of it. There are Jews who believe in Jesus as the Messiah and those who don’t – but they all remain Jews. So in is not proper for us to speak of the “conversion” of Saul as if Saul changed religions. That Saul became a powerful and effective proclaimer of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God, is without question and that reality caused quite a startling sense of amazement at that time – and, were we not so familiar with Paul, it may also carry amazement for us. How could it be that one who had tried to stamp out what he thought was a perversion of Judaism becomes one of its most ardent supporters? Luke clearly wants his readers to recognize that this was the work of God. It wasn’t that Paul was plagued by a guilty conscience or that he sat down and thought it all out. God intervened. Paul would testify to the same reality! From a strictly historical point of view – Luke and Paul remember the details of Saul’s time in Damascus and afterward differently. Luke tells us that Saul remained in Damascus for several days – an indeterminate time – and because Saul had become such an effective evangelist he came under threat of Jews in Damascus who did not believe in Jesus. They sought to kill Saul so he was helped to escape the city by night being lowered from a window in the city wall in a basket. As we will hear in tomorrow’s reading, from there Saul went immediately to Jerusalem where he was at first reluctantly accepted by the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem but eventually, through the intervention of Barnabas, became well known in Jerusalem going “in and out among them” (Acts 9:28). Because he was so effective and came under threat of being killed, after a short time he was brought to Caesarea and sent off to Tarsus because it was too dangerous for him to remain in Jerusalem. Paul tells us much the same story in his letter to the Galatians. It is important to say first of all that there are many things in common between these two versions of the same events. However, there are significant differences too. Paul tells us in Galatians that after God had “revealed his Son” to him – once again this is not viewed as a conversion to another religion but a correct understanding of Judaism – Paul began to proclaim Jesus among the Gentiles. He says specifically that he did not go up to Jerusalem to confer with any human being (Galatians 1:16-17). After an indeterminate period of time Paul tells us that he went to Arabia, eventually returning to Damascus (Galatians 1:17). It was only after three years that Paul finally did go to Jerusalem (Galatians 1:18). He stayed only 15 days and saw only two people, Peter and James the Lord’s brother, and then went into the region of Syria and Cilicia (where Tarsus is located) and it was only after fourteen more years that Paul finally made a public visit to Jerusalem (Galatians 1:18-2:1). And, Paul specifically says that until his visit fourteen years later – actually 17 years or so after his experience on the Damascus Road – he was “unknown by sight to the churches of Judea” (Galatians 1:22). The reality is that Luke and Paul remember the whole episode differently. From a historical point of view it is probably best to accept Paul’s version – after all he experienced it and we would either need to claim Paul is a liar or incredibly forgetful to claim otherwise. So, why did Luke tell the story as he did? We need to remember that from Luke’s point of view it was important for the Jerusalem church to verify and approve the mission of the church. The Apostles have a normative role. Something, by the way that Paul would not have accepted (Galatians 2:6). Luke’s version of Paul’s experience, though it is based on a kernel of historical reality, is more about Luke’s theology than it is about what actually happened. Luke’s point is important – the church needs a normative foundation. Paul’s reasons for telling the story are also important. Both proclaim the truth to us – each in different mode. Paul’s is likely the historical truth. Luke’s truth is theological and also necessarily important – although if our only measure of truth was to be historical accuracy we run into trouble with Luke’s story. It is a very good thing that our faith is not based on historical accuracy!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, June 24, 2013 Read – Acts 9:10-19a The scene now switches to Damascus – a city outside the territory of Judea. We are introduced to a man named Ananias (obviously not the same Ananias who was mentioned in Acts 5). Luke does not tell us anything either about Ananias or about how he became a believer – such detail is of no importance for Luke. We can be sure however that Ananias is a Jewish believer. Luke told us that Jesus “appeared” to Saul along the Damascus Road. Here he tells of a “vision” that comes to Ananias. Are we to distinguish between “appearances” like the one to Paul and “visions” like the one to Ananias? I think both of are the same nature. Of course that does not help us to decide exactly how an “appearance” and a “vision” works. The truth of the matter is that there is always something ambiguous about all of this. How do you know it is God who is speaking? How did the person “hear” the message they heard? All of those questions are simply beyond our reach. It is by faith that we accept the reality of what happened – and it was by faith that both Paul and Ananias came to believe that Jesus had really spoken to them. Luke portrays the vision of Ananias as a conversation between Ananias and the Lord. In fact, Ananias’ hesitation lends itself to our understanding of the ambiguity of all of this – it was ambiguous to Ananias too! We can understand Ananias’ hesitation. Who wouldn’t be cautious and wonder if this was really the Lord speaking to them in vision – or some demented spirit intent on bringing harm? It is by faith that Ananias goes and prays for Saul, laying his hands upon him, and becoming the vehicle through which Saul received his sight. Ananias’ words are significant. He reminds Saul of Saul’s own experience on the road where Jesus appeared to Saul. He tells Saul that he has been sent by God and that the outcome will be that the Holy Spirit will fill Saul for a mission God has in mind for him. Once the message has been delivered and the pray and laying on of hands completed, Saul regains his sight and is baptized. Readers of Acts are led to believe that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit came prior to the baptism in this case – there will be others when the order will be reversed. Those who want to make a distinction between water baptism and spirit baptism, as if spirit baptism somehow greater and even an addition to water baptism, have no grounds in the book of Acts to make such claims. Both are always kept together by Luke though the order varies. Lastly, we noted that Saul began to fast following the appearance of Jesus – now it the time for eating. We have noticed before the connection between receiving the gift of faith and eating. The disciples on the Emmaus Road recognized Jesus in the breaking of the bread (Luke 24:31). The disciples in the upper room were given fish and bread to eat as a sign of the reality of Jesus’ resurrection (Luke 24:42-43). Throughout the story in Acts the disciples are eating with one another. All of these references touch upon the reality of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. We need to recognize that Word and Sacrament are important for Luke in the spread of faith.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, June 23, 2013 Read – Acts 9:1-9 As we return to the book of Acts today we are introduced to one of the most important stories Luke wants to share with his readers – the story of Saul/Paul. We know that this is an important story because Luke tells it three times (Acts 9:1-31, Acts 22:6-16; and Acts 26:12-18). In many ways the placement of this story here creates a bridge between the two major sections of the book of Acts – the story of the spread of the gospel among the Jewish people and the story of the spread of the gospel through the Jewish people to the Gentiles. Luke has already skillfully introduced his readers to Saul. He was the one before whom those who stoned Stephen laid their coats (Acts 7:58) because Saul was approving of the killing of Stephen (Acts 8:1) and in response to the preaching of Stephen and as a part of the persecution that broke out against the Hellenist Christians, Saul began to ravish the church arresting believers and condemning them to prison (Acts 8:3). If Luke’s readers were wondering why Saul was singled out for comment in the story of Stephen’s martyrdom they now know why. God had something in mind for the persecutor. At the heart of Luke’s story is an appearance of Jesus to Saul. Readers of the book of Acts will recall that Luke has told us that Jesus appeared for 40 days following his resurrection and then was lifted up into heaven (Acts 1:1-11). We noted at that time that it was important for Luke to note that the bodily resurrection appearances of Jesus stopped. The ascension of Jesus is significant for Luke as a marker that Jesus is now at a new location, at the right hand of God where Jesus rules as Savior and Lord. The vehicle for the reign of Jesus on earth is through the Holy Spirit who Jesus pours out upon believers. In Luke’s view it is impossible and totally unnecessary that Jesus should bodily appear again following his ascension. That is the role of the Holy Spirit. As we read Luke’s story about the “appearance” of Jesus to Saul we can note the stark differences between this “appearance” and the pre-ascension appearances. Saul sees only a light that blinds him and hears a voice. Those who accompany Saul see no one (Acts 9:7)! Saul sees no one! There is no bodily appearance of Jesus. When the story is repeated in Acts 22 and Acts 26, again Luke is careful to make clear to his readers that a physical appearance of Jesus does not happen. Careful readers of the scripture will notice that Paul presents a difference point of view regarding the nature of the appearance of Jesus to him. Paul writes, “For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scripture, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scripture, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than 500 brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all he appeared also to me” (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Paul considers the appearance of Jesus to him to be of the same quality as his appearances to all the others. What are we to make of this discrepancy? The best way to think about this is to realize that Luke and Paul have different motives in telling about the appearance of Jesus. Paul is defending his apostleship – that he is truly a Christian and that his message is grounded on the foundation of the one and only gospel. We should note that what Paul writes here is almost exactly the core message that we have heard and will continue to hear in the book of Acts – Jesus was killed but God raised him from the dead and that repentance of sins in proclaimed in his name. Paul in not concerned about how we should think about the location of Jesus following his resurrection. It is likely that Paul makes no distinction between a bodily resurrection appearance and an appearance where there is no physical presence. Luke, on the other hand is concerned to deal with at least a couple of things. First, Jesus had made no bodily appearances in a long time and Luke wants to both acknowledge that and proclaim that even though such bodily appearances no longer occur Jesus is still present – he is present through the Holy Spirit. Second, Luke is concerned with order and the apostolic verification of the gospel. There likely were some who claimed that they had received “special revelation” from Jesus – that Jesus appeared to them! Limiting the bodily appearances of Jesus to a distinct length of time (40 days) and to a distinct group of people (the Apostles and their associates) cuts off any perversion of the gospel by those who claim “special revelation” or that somehow God had appeared to them giving them further information. The limited appearances of Jesus in bodily form becomes normative for Luke and for the church. Of course Luke can speak of Jesus “appearing” to others – he obviously does so since he is telling us this story about Saul! – however, those appearance are not of the same quality as the bodily appearance prior to the ascension. Once we understand the difference between Luke’s and Paul’s motives the discrepancy melts away. Luke ends this story on an important note – Saul begins to fast, eating nothing for three days. He is also blind. The story contains a kernel of suspense for Luke’s first readers – what will become of Saul?

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, June 22, 2013 Read – Luke 23:32-49 The purpose of reading Luke’s story of the death of Jesus is simply to notice how the death of Stephen parallels the death of Jesus. Both deaths have much in common – the victim is innocent, the victim asks for forgiveness of those who perpetrate the death, the victim commends his spirit into the hand of God. Followers of Jesus are to indeed “follow” Jesus – even in death.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, June 21, 2013 Read – Isaiah 66:1-4 The second passage that Stephen referred to in his speech is a quotation from Isaiah 66:1-2. This time the quotation is much more direct and follows the Septuagint version of the OT exactly. Stephen is not addressing the accusation that he has been saying that Jesus had claimed that he would destroy the Temple and in three days build another. Actually, Jesus had not said that he would destroy the Temple but Jesus did mourn the destruction of the Temple and did predict that it would be destroyed (Luke 21:5; 20-24). The Temple is a good place in Luke’s understanding, as we have noticed before – the Temple is not the enemy and neither Jesus nor his followers are opposed to the Temple. Yet, the Temple can become an “idol” when people are not in a right relationship with God. That is Stephen’s point – and he uses this OT passage to back it up. There are also other places in the OT, particularly in Jeremiah, where a false sense of security based on the Temple is spoken against. Luke may have chosen any of those – but, it appears, Isaiah was his favorite so he turns to that book.

Weekly Announcements June 23 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, June 20, 2013 Read – Amos 5:18-27 In his speech Stephen quotes from Amos 5:25-27. The quotation is not direct – Luke has either misunderstood some of the names or he deliberately changed them to give them more impact for his readers. That is of little importance. Our reading for today covers a few extra verses from Amos. These verses are the first OT statement about the Day of the LORD being a day of darkness. As time passed the image took on more and more graphic details – the moon turning to blood and the sun becoming like black sackcloth. The point that Amos was making is that the coming of the LORD may not be what people expect – it will not be a day of vindication for all but rather a day of judgment. That is the point that Stephen shares with Amos and that is why these verses are pointed to. Like Amos, Stephen’s speech is one of judgment.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Read – Psalm 105 Psalm 105 rehearses much of the same story as Psalm 78 but from a much more positive point of view. Psalm 105 has a twin, Psalm 106, which once again shades the story in more negative tones. These Psalms are important because they crystalize the story for us. The OT is a long and sometimes difficult book to read. Psalms like these and other summaries of the OT story help us get the story without wading through so many words. Some other summaries in the Bible are the following : Deuteronomy 6:20-24, Deuteronomy 26:5-9, Joshua 24:2-13, Nehemiah 9:6-31, and Psalm 136. In the NT, along with Stephen’s speech, Hebrews 11 provides a good summary.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, June 18, 2013 Read – Psalm 78 There are several Psalms that rehearse the OT story. Psalm 78 is one of the longer of these Psalms and provides a good summary of the OT story. It is likely that Psalms like Psalm 78 were used within worship to remember the story. They may also have been good teaching tools. They provided a way to remember and celebrate the history of God’s people – a history those who used them in worship shared. Psalm 78 is a rather negative version of the story. We will look at a more positive version tomorrow.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, June 17, 2013 Read – Isaiah 1:1-20 We’re going to go back this week and pick up some OT passages that may have influenced Luke in his writing of the book of Acts. Most of these passages connect with the story of Stephen and his martyrdom. The opening words of the book of Isaiah speak of a people who are lost in the bondage of sin. They are sick from head to toe. In some senses this was the message that Stephen proclaimed to the people of his day. One might wonder how Isaiah was received. His words are not pleasant to read or to hear. Yet, it is often the truth of words like Isaiah’s or Stephen’s that are needed and they may lead to repentance.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, June 16, 2013 Read – Acts 8:26-40 The main character in the next story is still Philip. He has now left Samaria and ventured to the edges of Judea – on the way to Gaza which was at that time, as it is today, on the fringes of Judaism. The Philistines once controlled Gaza and still had influence at this time of history. But it is not really the inhabitants of Gaza who are important to this story. Rather we are introduced to a rather peculiar man – an Ethiopian eunuch. Who are we to understand this man to be? Luke is silent about his race – was he Jewish? Or was he a Gentile? Luke does not say. But, it is likely that even if this man was of the Jewish race he would not have been recognized as a Jew because he was a eunuch. Jewish law specifically declared that eunuchs were “cut off” from the people of God (Deuteronomy 23:1). Yet, the prophet Isaiah had said that even eunuch will have a place within God’s house (Isaiah 56:3-8). Luke deliberately makes the identity of this man ambiguous. The story is another of those wonderful stories that Luke has given us – it belongs with stories like the travelers on the Emmaus road – the story even sounds a lot like that story. In the story the Ethiopian eunuch is reading from the book of Isaiah – Luke’s favorite. He is reading from Isaiah 53, the last of the servant songs. But, his reading is not productive – he does not comprehend. So, Philip does what Jesus did in the Emmaus story and was said to do in the upper room on Easter evening – he opens the scripture so that he can understand by using this scripture and apparently others to tell the story of Jesus. I have spoken of “Messianic Exegesis” before and this is more of it. This story functions for Luke to remind his readers of the need to understand Jesus through the message of the OT and to understand the OT through the lens of the death and resurrection of Jesus. There is one more thing we should notice about the passage from Isaiah that Luke quotes. Luke has been selective in his use of this scripture. For theological reasons Luke lifts out the part of Isaiah that speak of an innocent one who is denied justice – but he omits the parts from Isaiah of this innocent one bearing the sins of others. We need to remember that Luke omitted Mark’s reference to Jesus as a “ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). The death of Jesus is not a matter of atonement for Luke – his death is not a sacrificial death for Luke. Jesus dies as the righteous one who fulfills God’s will. He is vindicated as the righteous one through the resurrection God accomplished in him. And he is exulted as the Savior through whom repentance – repentance not so much for sin as for not welcoming God’s visitation – is offered. This may be a subtle difference between Luke and other writers such as Mark and Paul. We need to not make too much of it but just notice Luke’s consistency and also his theology.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, June 15, 2013 Read – Acts 8:4-25 The martyrdom of Stephen ended with the followers of Jesus scattered from place to place outside of the city of Jerusalem. What likely was a trying time gives way to the proclamation of the gospel to those in the next ring around Jerusalem – Judea and Samaria. The first two episodes of that activity are centered on the work of Philip – likely we should understand this to be the Philip who was one of the Seven Hellenist Jews, a partner of Stephen. A word needs to be said about the Samaritans. A great deal of animosity had arisen between the Jews and the Samaritans in the time prior to the coming of Jesus. The Samaritans were the remnants of the Northern Kingdom of Israel which had been destroyed by the Assyrians in 722 BC. Over the course of time they had intermingled with foreigners who were brought in by the Assyrians – yet they had maintained a form of religious faith that paralleled that of the main group who returned to Judea following the exile of the Southern Kingdom to Babylon. Two of the main differences between the Jews of Judea and the Samaritans were that the Samaritans accepted only the first five books of the Bible as scripture and they understood that the worship of God was to be centered on Mount Gerazim near the ancient town of Shechem where Jacob’s well was located. The Jews despised the Samaritans as half-breeds and not fully Israelites. Tensions were great between the two. That Christians should reach out to Samaritans was quite a dramatic occurrence. Of course Jesus had set the stage for this. Jesus did not despise the Samaritans and on at least two occasions it was Samaritans who were heroes – the story of the 10 lepers who were healed and only a Samaritan returned to give thanks and the parable of the Good Samaritan. Both of these stories are told only by Luke. More than any other writer Luke emphasizes Jesus outreach to and acceptance of Samaritans. Within the story of Philip’s ministry to the Samaritans are contained two important pieces of information that Luke wants his readers to hear. The first has to do with a man who lived in Samaria named Simon. Luke tells us that Simon was a magician and apparently had quite a following. While Luke does not mention anything about this, a century or so later the Christian church had identified this Simon as the founder of a religious system known as Gnosticism. It is likely however, that this is not really true – there is little evidence of Gnosticism prior to the second century when it flourished in both a Christian and non-Christian form. At any rate Luke wants to point out the fallacy of people like Simon and to distinguish between magic on the one hand and miraculous faith on the other. Magic is about attempting to control God. Miraculous faith is being controlled by God. Simon’s fault is that he wanted to be in control. The second thing that Luke wants to make clear is that the Samaritan mission is effective only when and because it is sanctioned by the Apostles who remain in Jerusalem. Philip has proclaimed the gospel and the Samaritans have responded positively but it is only when Peter and John arrive that the Holy Spirit comes upon the Samaritans. We will notice this in other ways as the mission goes forward. Verification by the Apostles is an important matter for Luke. One of the main reasons for that may well be the desire to have only one church. Just as unity between the Hebrew speaking Christians and the Greek speaking Christians was crucial, so here the Samaritans must be incorporated into the one church. And the way to insure that incorporation is through the verification of Peter and John, representative of the Apostles. How easy it may have been to have developed a Hebrew Christianity and then a Hellenist Christianity and now a Samaritan Christianity. Eventually there may have been a Gentile Christianity too. What is at stake in the authorization of ministry by the Apostles is the unity of the church. Finally, it is important to note again that reaching out to the Samaritans was a major hurdle to overcome within the early church. That hurdle could be crossed with the Samaritans because Jesus had opened the door and because the Samaritans were at least connected to Judaism from past heritage. The hurdle regarding gentiles remains in the future at this point in Luke’s story – but that hurdle is fast approaching.

Weekly Announcements June 16 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, June 14, 2013 Read – Acts 7:51-8:3 As his speech approaches its conclusion Stephen unloads with both barrels – “You stiff-necked people …” (Acts 7:51). We could see it coming and likely so could the religious authorities. We have noticed that all of the speeches in Acts contain a core message. Stephen’s speech is a bit different. The first part of the core message is spoken – “They killed those who foretold the coming of the Righteous One, and now you have become his betrayers and murderers” (Acts 7:52). The rest of the core message is cut off – the people become so enraged that they attack Stephen dragging him out of the city and stoning him. And while he is being stoned, Stephen sees Jesus at the right hand of God – the place where Jesus now reigns. It is important to notices at this point that in his gospel, Luke edited Mark’s story when Jesus was on trial before the religious authorities. In Mark, when Jesus is asked if he is the Son of the Blessed One (Son of God), Jesus says, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power; and coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62). As we noted earlier, Luke tells us that Jesus said, “But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God” and then when the question “Are you the Son of God?” is asked Jesus replies with the ambiguous, “You say that I am” (Luke 22:69-7). Gone from Luke is any mention of Jesus coming with the clouds of heaven. Stephen sees Jesus exactly where Jesus had said he would be. Stephen was not allowed to proclaim that this Jesus whom you crucified, God raised from the dead so that now repentance and forgiveness of sins is made possible through him. Luke’s readers hear the remainder of the core message in the experience of Stephen. Readers of the book of Acts have long noticed that the way in which the death of Stephen is told parallels the way in which the death of Jesus is told. Both are innocent. Both ask God to forgive their murderers. Both commend their spirits into God’s hands. The death of the first martyr reprises the death of the Messiah. As the scene concludes Luke provides his readers with two important pieces of information. First he introduces Saul who not only approved the murder of Stephen but begins a rampage against the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem (Acts 7:58, 8:1, & 8:3). This three-fold reference to Saul is purposefully done by Luke – he does not want his readers to miss it. We will hear more of Saul in the days to come. The second piece of information that Luke provides his reader is that the followers of Jesus were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria because of the persecution that unfolded. Like a stone falling in a body of water the ripples move outward. We may hear this as a tragic and negative event. And perhaps the first followers of Jesus experienced it as such. But in the end this too was the work of the Holy Spirit – “you will be my witness in Jerusalem, and all Judea and Samaria” (Acts 1:8). Only the Apostles remain in Jerusalem – which seems like a rather peculiar thing. Were they not in the most danger? Perhaps, but Luke has other reasons than simply providing historical information in telling us that the Apostles remain in Jerusalem. Jerusalem will remain at the center. The message will radiate out from Jerusalem – and verification from Jerusalem will also be necessary. Historically, it is likely that it was only the Hellenist Greek speaking Christians who suffered persecution at this time. The Hebrew speaking church, represented by the Apostles, likely was spared. This also explains why the Apostles remained in Jerusalem and as the book of Acts moves forward it is also apparent that other Hebrew speaking Christians remained in Jerusalem along with the Apostles.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, June 13, 2013 Read – Acts 7:44-50 We have already noticed the unusual way in which Stephen proceeded. He has yet to answer the main charge against him – that he has been proclaiming that Jesus said he would destroy the Temple. In this part of the speech he is getting closer to addressing that charge. Having brought the experience of Moses before his accusers as a kind of evidence that they are behaving like those who rejected Moses, Stephen now turns to the Temple. What Stephen points out is something the OT also knows very well – originally it was not God’s idea to build a Temple! God had provided a tent and that seems to be adequate to God (2 Samuel 7:4-17). Though it was David’s desire to build a magnificent Temple, God did not allow him to do so. It was Solomon who actually built the Temple. Throughout the OT there is this ambiguous tension centered on the Temple. Stephen uses that tension here. Once again Luke points to an OT passage from the prophets – this time from Isaiah. “Thus says the LORD; heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is my resting place? All these things my hand has made and so all these things are mine, says the LORD” (Isaiah 66:1-2). We have noticed that Luke does not share Mark’s hostility toward the Temple – for Mark the Temple must be destroyed. The Temple is still important for Luke and he has told us many times that the followers of Jesus were worshiping in the Temple. From Luke’s point of view what Jesus did was not destroy the Temple but reclaim it as God’s turf. That is the case here as well. The Temple does not belong to the religious aristocracy – it belongs to God. Stephen’s speech is nearing its conclusion. We can imagine his hearers beginning to fume with rage. It was not a speech to win the support of the religious aristocracy.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, June 12, 2013 Read – Acts 7:35-43 Moses is still at the center of Stephen’s speech – but one senses that the speech is growing in intensity. The religious leaders were likely able to put two and two together and recognize that this was all leading to an accusation against them. Just as the people had been unfaithful and rebelled against Moses – Stephen was building a case of their unfaithfulness in rejecting Jesus. Luke does allude to one OT passage in the speech of Stephen as fulfilling the words of the prophets. The reference is rather obscure, but when Stephen says, “Did you offer to me slain victims and sacrifices forty years in the wilderness O house of Israel?” he is likely pointing to Amos 5:25. The rest of the quote does not reflect the further words of Amos – other “gods” are listed there. One might explain this discrepancy by reasoning that Luke may have been working from memory – and just as our memories sometimes betray us, Luke’s may have been a bit cloudy. The whole issue is of little significance to the point Luke and Stephen are making.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, June 11, 20-13 Read – Acts 7:17-34 Stephen’s speech continues with the Exodus and the rejection of the leadership of Moses. Actually, Stephen is a defender of Moses and not a blasphemer against him as he was accused of being. The rejection of Moses by the people serves Stephen and Luke well in their accusation of the Jewish leaders who were against them. Just as Moses suffered rejection – a fact of history shared by both sides – Jesus suffered rejection. Jesus was like Moses – in fact Jesus was the very one that Moses said God would raise up (Deuteronomy 18:15)!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, June 10, 2013 Read – Acts 7:1-16 The speech given by Stephen is the longest of all the speeches in the book of Acts. It is mostly are recitation of the history of the OT people. Many have wondered why Stephen would make this long recitation before the Sanhedrin. Obviously they all knew the story very well. Perhaps for Luke this was a way of rehearsing the OT story for his readers who may not have known it. At any rate it is a good review for us. We do not need to say much about this recitation of OT history. There is one minor detail that has intrigued careful readers of the story. Stephen says that Abraham bought a burial ground from the sons of Hamor in Shechem. When the story is told in the book of Genesis Abraham purchase the burial plot from Ephron, the Hittite, and the location was at Machpelah (Genesis 23:8-16). Hamor of Shechem was the leader Jacob dealt with upon his return after living for 20 years in fear of Esau. This is a minor issue that need not trouble us – but it does remind us that the Bible is perhaps a more complicated book that we might think. If we want to read similar recitations of OT history, Psalm 78, 105, and 106 are good places to turn. Knowing the OT story is crucial for understanding the NT writings.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, June 9, 2013 Read – Acts 6:1-15 As we return to the book of Acts we may be wondering at this point how much time has passed since the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus? The way in which Luke begins this story suggests that we have moved on some distance from what comes before it – “Now during those days …” (Acts 6:1). Of course we are not fully able to discern the amount of time that has passed – and the next marker that we can turn to is the experience of Saul/Paul which likely took place at least two years later. And then matters will jump considerably forward. It is somewhat remarkable that Luke has told us so much – and yet he has told us so few episodes. Earlier in the book of Acts, Luke has told his readers that the first followers held all things in common and that they provided for the needs of all – with no one being in want (Acts 2:43-47 and Acts 4:32-37). This story unveils tension within the growing flock of followers. In order for us to understand the situation correctly we need to know who the Hebrews and the Hellenists were. First of all it is crucial to note that both were Jewish people. So far in Luke’s story every follower of Jesus is a Jew. The Hebrews were those who had lived their life within the boundaries of Israel and likely spoke Aramaic as their first language. The Hellenists were also Jews who had lived in other countries and likely spoke Greek as their first language. Some of these people, as we will hear, may well have been gentiles but they have all become Jews. Proselytes are gentiles who have become observant Jewish, been circumcised if they are male, and live now as fully Jewish people. The issue that arises in the community is that the Hellenists are complaining because their widows are being neglected. Favoritism seems to be favoring the Hebrew widows. One of the tenants of Judaism was that the care of widows, orphans, and aliens was expected. Many of these people had little or no means of providing anything for themselves much less for the common good. At any rate tensions arise. The twelve solve the issue by calling the whole group together. They make a wise decision. If they try to do everything they will fail – in fact the mission of proclaiming the gospel will fail, the word of God will be neglected. So an arrangement for expanding the leadership of the community takes place. Since the Hellenists were having the problem, seven Hellenist men are appointed to correct the situation. While it is probably quite a stretch to see this occurrence as a kind of “ordination” into ministry – it is at least a forerunner of what the church would later put into practice. At any rate the problem is resolved. And Luke does not miss an opportunity to tell his readers that the “number of the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem” (Acts 6:7). In fact, many priests became believers (Acts 6:7). It has been estimated that it required about 8,000 priests to fully operate the Temple over the course of a year – they did not all stay there at once but took turns as the story of Zechariah illustrates (Luke 1:5-25). It is likely these priests that Luke is referring to and not the aristocracy which included the High Priest. As the story unfolds the attention is directed to Stephen – he was named first and already highlighted in that way (Acts 6:5). Stephen not only helped with the distribution of food – he also began to proclaim the gospel. And according to Luke he was quite skillful at it – of course Luke reminds his readers that it was the Spirit who spoke through him. Like Peter and John before him Stephen is soon in the midst of trouble – opposition arises. The leaders of the opposition were likely also Hellenist Jews, but they did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah. What is described is a conflict within Judaism. The accusations against Stephen are interesting. Stephen is accused of attempting to destroy the Temple and speaking words of blasphemy against Moses – likely meaning against the Law (Torah). Earlier, when Jesus was being accused before the high priest and the Sanhedrin during his trial, in Mark’s gospel the chief accusation against Jesus was that he had claimed that he would destroy the Temple made with hands and in three days build another (Mark 14:58). Interestingly, Luke omits all of that in the trial of Jesus. It is never mentioned in Luke’s gospel! The accusation shows up here. This is another of the clear pieces of evidence that Luke wrote his gospel and the book of Acts as one book. He can afford to omit things because he knows he will pick them up later! So, what in Mark is the main piece of evidence provided by false witness against Jesus becomes the source of evidence against Stephen. And so it is Stephen’s turn to be on trial.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, June 8, 2013 Read – Psalm 77 I’m not sure why, but Psalm 77 has become a favorite of mine. At first glance the words of Psalm 77 seem like the complaining of an unfaithful person. As I have meditated upon them I have come to the conclusion that they are the words of a person of very deep faith – a faith we can admire. Though all seems to point in the opposite direction the psalmist still remains adamant in faith. This faith grows only when the psalmist reflects upon the mighty acts of God in the past. It is these acts that give hope in a hopeless present. During those moments when we feel desperate and alone and wonder if God is real, this psalmist takes us by the hand and leads us to a new place of faith. We can be thankful for the psalmist’s deep insight into the perils of life – and the journey to a deeper faith.

June 2013 Echoes

CLICK HERE

June 2013 Calendar

CLICK HERE

Weekly Announcements Jun 9 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, June 7, 2013 Read – Psalm 73 Psalm 73 shares the concerns of Psalm 49 and of Luke regarding the perils of wealth and the apparent security that possessions seem to promise. Once again we are reminded that Luke has good company in his view regarding possessions. Luke may not have had these Psalms in mind – he never references any of them – but they support his point of view.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, June 6, 2013 Read – Psalm 49 Luke has spoken often in his gospel and now in the book of Acts of the perils of wealth. This Psalm reflects the same point of view. Wealth cannot provide security to anyone – even though those who are blessed with wealth are tempted to begin to think that wealth can provide security. The wisdom of Luke regarding possessions is a wisdom also conveyed in the OT. A reading of the book of Ecclesiastes provides the same insight. We would do well to hear Luke’s words of caution and warning. He was not the first to speak these warnings – however he may have been the most bold in doing do.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, June 5, 2013 Read – Acts 5:17-42 We have met opposition before in a story that sounds very similar to this one (Acts 4:1-22). Once again the apostles are arrested. In the previous story it was only Peter and John who were arrested but here Luke’s seems to imply that all twelve are included. It is important to notice who is implicated in the arrest and who is not. Luke tells us it was the religious establishment that arrested them – “the high priest and all who were with him, that is the sect of the Sadducees” (Acts 5:17). Luke has been very careful to distinguish between the religious establishment which was mostly made up of Sadducees and leading men of power and the Pharisees who were at least somewhat open to Jesus. That continues here. In fact, as we will soon learn, it is a Pharisee, Gamaliel, who rescues the apostles from the fate the other religious leaders may have had in mind. It is important for careful readers of Luke and the other gospel writers to notice that Luke differs from the others with respect to the Pharisees. That, of course, leads us to wonder which tells the “correct” historical view. That is something we simply are not able to determine. The story Luke tells us reveals that God is the one who is really active in what is happening. Just as Jesus was arrested at night and held until morning (Luke 22:54,66), and just as Peter and John were also held in custody until morning the first time they were arrested (Acts 4:3), the apostles are held overnight in the prison. But a strange thing happens in this story. Though the prison remains securely locked they are freed. One might think that they would have been a bit more careful – but once they are freed they are right back at proclaiming Jesus in the Temple. Luke’s story is written to emphasize that point – the apostles are fearless and will not be stopped. Or, should we say, the Holy Spirit working in them will not be stopped. Arrested again, they appear before the religious establishment. Again Peter is the spokesman. And – we should not be surprised by now to hear it – Peter’s defense repeats the core message in all the speeches in Acts – “The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exulted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins” (Acts 5:30-31). The religious authorities are not convinced and seek to kill the apostles. But, into the fray steps a Pharisee, Gamaliel, who Luke tells us was a member of the Sanhedrin. We have met another member of the council, or Sanhedrin, who is also a good and faithful man – Joseph of Arimathea who provided for Jesus’ burial. Though Luke does not tell us, Joseph was also likely a Pharisee. Gamaliel was likely the grandson of a famous Jewish rabbi, Hillel, who was noted for his wisdom. Hillel was the one who likely first brought the two great commandments, love God and love your neighbor as yourself, together having remarked that all the rest of the Law was commentary on these two. This is likely also the same Gamaliel who had served as Saul’s teacher. It must have been dangerous for Gamaliel to act as he did. After all death was hanging in the balance. But Gamaliel speaks with a wisdom that is difficult to argue against – “if this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail, but if it is of God you will not be able to overthrow it” (Act 5:38-39). In coming to his conclusion Gamaliel pointed to two other “uprisings” that happened during those times. Pointing to these other “Messiahs” who had ended in disaster is effective – but it is not without problems for those who study history closely. Luke speaks of a man named Theudas and another named Judas, the Galilean, (this is not the Judas who betrayed Jesus). Other historical documents, particularly Josephus, also write about these people. That helps to verify that they really existed. Unfortunately, the timing of each is in dispute. Josephus tells us that Judas, the Galilean, led his rebellion in 6 AD in protest of the taxation policy enforced at that time. It is likely that it was this same taxation that Luke has in minds when he tells us that Mary and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem to be enrolled since this is the only census and taxation event known in the time period. Josephus also tells us that Theudas led his rebellion in about 44AD, which would have put it about 10 years after the events Luke is narrating in the book of Acts. How are we to resolve these conflicts? We can decide that it is Josephus who has it wrong – but that would be rather unusual since his chronology has been demonstrated to be quite accurate in all other cases. Or, perhaps Luke is simply referring to these two episodes he knows about at this point not knowing exactly when they occurred. By the time Luke wrote his gospel and the book of Acts all of these events would have been in the relatively distant past. Gamaliel is successful and the apostles are spared – at least for the time being. Luke will narrate the death of James in due time. In fact the very next episode that Luke narrates will be the appointment of Stephen and his martyrdom. The plot of Luke’s narrative is advancing and there is an escalation of hostility occurring. In the first arrest, Peter and John were commanded to stop speaking about Jesus but released unharmed. Here, the apostles are flogged – a serious punishment that had the possibility of ending in death. As the story ends Luke tells us that the apostles do not stop – they cannot since the Holy Spirit is empowering them. They continue to witness in the Temple and at home. The Holy Spirit is on the move among them.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, June 4, 2013 Read – Acts 5:12-16 Luke’s summary passage in our reading for today both helps to move the story along and challenges us as readers. Luke has been telling his readers of an expanding group of believers. So far all of those believers are Jews. It began with 120 who gathered in the days right after Jesus’ resurrection up to the time of his ascension (Acts 1:15). The group grew by about 3,000 on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was first poured out up the believers (Acts 2:41). It had grown to at least 5,000 by the time Peter and John had healed the lame man (Act 4:4). Luke has told his readers that “day by day the Lord added to their number” (Acts 2:47). In today’s reading Luke tells us “more than ever believers were added to the Lord, great numbers of both men and women” (Acts 4:14). This growth in numbers came about because of the “signs and wonders” that were done through the apostles. One of the themes that we noticed in Luke’s gospel is his insistence that his readers know that Jewish people did receive the Messiah, Jesus. They did welcome the visitation of God to his people. And that is the point Luke is making once again. Anyone who thinks that the Jews rejected the Messiah needs to think again! Christians are simply Jews who received the Messiah God sent – and they remain Jews. Christianity is an expression of Judaism! Luke will argue that Christianity is the true Judaism – not a new religion at all but the fulfilling of the old. It is important that Christians remember that. Christianity is Judaism! So far, so good – but now the story takes a turn that is hard to understand. In the story of the healing of the lame man Luke was very careful to make clear that these signs and wonders were not the work of human beings but of God. “You Israelites, why do you wonder at this, or why do you stare at us, as though by our own power or piety we had made him walk” (Acts 3:12)? Has Luke become just a little too exuberant in his description of Peter whose shadow seems now to have power to heal? Isn’t this simply a description of magic – not really connected with repentance and faith at all? Perhaps readers in Luke’s time were not troubled with questions like these – but we are. The truth is, of course, that this little issue really doesn’t matter much – it is just a curiosity for Luke’s readers of today to ponder. We can hear the greater message – the power of the Holy Spirit is expanding the church!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, June 3, 2013 Read – Acts 5:1-11 Luke has just told his readers a story of a faithful believer, Barnabas, who sold all he had and laid the money at the apostles’ feet (Acts 4:37). The next story begins with the word “but” which links these two stories together (Acts 5:1). Barnabas is the good example of the proper view and use of possessions. Ananias and Sapphira provide the opposite example – they are possessed by their possessions and finally destroyed by them. This is a dreadful story. We can hardly read it without feeling at least some sympathy for Ananias and Sapphira – the punishment does not seem to fit the crime. There is precedent for this story in the OT. The story of Achan, who took some of the wealth of Jericho, tells a similar story (Joshua 7). Like Ananias and Sapphira, Achan, and his whole family, pay with their lives. How are we to take some value from these stories? At the very least, Luke has got our attention. And perhaps that is the point. The shocking nature of the story brings us up short – and hopefully causes us to think more deeply about our own lives and our own possessions. It is no wonder that Luke concludes the story with the words, “great fear seized the whole church and all who heard of these things” (Acts 5:11). Keeping these two stories – one about Barnabas and the other about Ananias and Sapphira – together is helpful. Luke plays the stories against each other. And his message to his readers becomes clearer when both stories are heard together. One more thought about these stories. They hint at and illustrate that the early church was not without its struggles. We are tempted to imagine a “golden age” when all was perfect. Such a time never happened. From the very beginning the church has faced conflict and struggle. There will be more to come as Luke unfolds his story in the book of Acts. By the time we reach chapter six we will confront this issue again from another point of view.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, June 2, 2013 Read – Acts 4:32-37 Acts 4:32-5:11 needs to be read as a single unit. I would suggest that you go back and read Acts 5:1-11 if you haven’t already done so. We will be looking at this unit over two days making the necessary connections. This is not the first time Luke has told his readers about the followers of Jesus having all things in common. Right after the dramatic story of Pentecost Luke tells a similar story (Acts 2:43-47). Together these stories paint a picture of the early followers of Jesus living in harmony with one another. Luke has told us that the number of believers has grown to at least 5,000 people. It is hard to imagine so large a group living in the way described here. Perhaps Luke is meaning for his readers to imagine a smaller group – more like the original 120 people – as he tells this story. At any rate, the “experiment” of communal ownership seems not to have lasted long and may have ended in “failure” simply because as the church grew administration of such an enterprise became impossible. The rest of the book of Acts and the NT as a whole assume private ownership. So why does Luke tell us this story? Readers of Luke’s gospel will recall that Luke has made much of the perils of wealth and the proper use of possessions in the writing of his gospel. That theme is carried forward here – especially if one reads the story of Ananias and Sapphirah together with this story. Luke’s point all along has been that possessions have a strangling way of possessing those who have them – as the dreadful story of Ananias and Sapphirah illustrates. As one reads the story more closely, especially in light of what is said about Ananias and Sapphirah, the communal sharing of possessions was apparently a voluntary gesture – not something that one had to do but certainly Luke would have recommended it. Getting loose from possessions lest they possess a person is Luke’s point. Luke has told stories of the proper use of possessions – Zacheaus to name one – and as the book of Acts moves forward there will be others as well. One more thing may lie in the background of this story. In the book of Deuteronomy in the discussion about the sabbatical year and how the people of Israel were to redistribute the Land every fifty years the statement is made, “There will, however, be no one in need among you, because the LORD is sure to bless you in the land that the LORD your God is giving you as a possession to occupy” (Deuteronomy 15:4). The Land is the LORD’s and remains the LORD’s even though people are given the blessing of occupying it! Luke may well have been carrying that theme forward here. “There was not a needy person among them” (Acts 4:34). It is an illusion to think anyone possesses anything. What we call our own is really God’s gift to us. We are reminded of the old song many of us may have sung as the offertory for years – “We give thee but thine one, whate’re the gift may be; all that we have is thine alone, a trust O Lord from thee” – that song recognizes a truth all Christian stewards have come to realize. Everything we call our own is really God’s. What we give back to God was first given to us. The community Luke envisions shares this view. And his first example, Barnabas, illustrates the proper understanding and use of possessions. The story also gives Luke an opportunity to introduce Barnabas who will be a major character in the second half of the book of Acts.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, June 1, 2013 Read – Psalm 118:19-24 The Psalms we have been reading for the past few days were not used by the NT writers. Our Psalm for today, Psalm 118, is the Psalm used by NT writers more often than any other. It was used by a variety of NT writers. We encountered this Psalm in the speech of Peter and John before the religious establishment in Jerusalem. As we recalled when we were reading Acts 4, the exact verse of this Psalm was also used by Jesus when he confronted the same religious establishment. It is interesting to contemplate the original psalmist’s meaning in his Psalm. Psalm 118 is one of those Psalms that knows of the hardship and pain of lament but now sings of the deliverance of God. The image of a stone that was once rejected becoming the chief cornerstone speaks of the mystery of God bringing about good in the midst of what is not good. What was rejected is what is now of value. A person who once felt rejected and abandoned in now of value too. It is suggested that Psalm 118 be read at the graveside as the burial of loved ones is taking place. The promise of the Psalm is that even the grave can become a doorway to eternal life – “this is the gate of the LORD” (Psalm 118:20). The Psalm speaks of a great reversal. One of Luke’s themes is that of reversal – “the high are brought down from their thrones and the lowly are lifted up” (Luke 1:52). Contemplating this Psalm was helpful for the first followers of Jesus – and as they read it through the filter of the death and resurrection of Jesus they heard it with new ears.