Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, August 31, 2013 Read – Acts 28:1-10 Once the participants in the journey have made it safely to land Luke tells us of one last threat that has the potential of preventing Paul from arriving in Rome. As Paul gathers wood and throws it on the fire a venomous snake, a viper, attaches itself to Paul’s hand. The inhabitants of the island expect that Paul will soon be dead – a prisoner guilty of a crime will not go unpunished. Paul may have made it safely to land but justice will not be robbed. After a sufficient time has passed and the natives realize that Paul is not going to die they begin to think that he must be a god – ordinary people do not survive viper bites! This story sounds a little like the story Luke told us earlier when Paul and Barnabas visit Lystra (Acts 14:8-18). In that story Paul was also mistaken as a god. In the story at Lystra, Paul and Barnabas protest and finally convince the people that they are not gods – and in the end the people turn on Paul and Barnabas and drive them out of town. Here there is no word of protest. Perhaps we should not make anything of that. Luke and Luke’s readers know that Paul is not a god – it is curious though that Luke does not make that clear. Luke follows up the story of the viper with another that reminds Luke’s readers of two other stories he has told us – the story of Peter’s shadow bringing healing to many (Acts 5:15) and of Paul’s handkerchiefs and aprons bringing healing to any who touched them (Acts 19:12). Both of these other stories are troublesome to most of us – they sound too much like magic! So in this story Paul heals the leader of the island’s father and then goes on to bring healing to many others on the island. Stories like these are difficult for us to understand, mostly because we have been trained with a scientific mind, and we can think of many examples when what was done by Paul is not and maybe cannot be repeated. We want to generalize the experience from a single instance to a general principle and we know that it does not hold true. While we may have difficulty dealing with these stories we will need to let them stand as part of Luke’s story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, August 30, 2013 Read – Acts 27:39-44 “And so it was that all were brought safely to land” (Acts 27:44). With morning light the sailor and the travelers on the ship see a sight they have longed to see. It has been about two weeks since they were driven into the midst of the sea and the midst of despair. Now the hope of rescue is born once again. The sailors plan seems to be a good one. They will sail the ship into a bay on an unknown island. Readers of Acts are reminded of Paul’s words delivered by an angel that all the people will be saved but the ship will be lost. Will the word of the angel be true? The plan of the sailors is dashed on an unforeseen reef. Caught on the reef the ship began to break apart – the word of the angel was true. For one last time on the fateful journey Paul’s life is put in danger from two sources. How were the passengers to get to land – would some drown in the sea? And to make matters worse the soldiers who were in charge of guarding the prisoners decide to kill them so that they do not escape. A soldier was held responsible for his prisoner and if the prisoner escaped the soldier would pay with his own life. We saw that in Peter’s deliverance from prison in Jerusalem – when the authorities had determined that Peter was free the guards were killed (Acts 12:19). Once again a Roman comes to Paul’s rescue. The centurion protects Paul and the other prisoners – there will be no loss of life just as the angel said. And everyone makes it safely to the shores. The sea voyage that seemed to spell certain disaster for Paul comes to a good end – but the voyage is not quite over. They discover that they have landed on an island called Malta to the south and west of Italy. They will now wait for better weather to make the final journey to Rome.

Sept 2013 Calendar

CLICK HERE

Sept 2013 Echoes Newsletter

CLICK HERE

Weekly Announcements Sept 1 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, August 29, 2013 Read – Acts 27:31-38 Just before daybreak Luke tells us Paul enacts what for some must have seemed like a strange action. He gathers the voyagers for a meal. Meals have had a very important function in Luke’s gospel and the book of Acts. There is something about eating. Readers of Luke’s gospel are reminded of how Jesus broke the bread and opened the eyes of the travelers on the Emmaus Road. Readers are reminded that when Paul was brought into Damascus blinded by the light he did not eat until Ananias had restored his sight. What are we to make of this meal aboard ship? It is tempting, of course, to understand this meal as the celebration of Holy Communion. There are elements of the story that lend themselves to that interpretation – “he took bread, and giving thanks to God in the presence of all, he broke it and began to eat” (Acts 27:35). Those words sound too much like the communion liturgy to be accidental. And Luke likely wants his readers to make that connection. But it is also more likely that Paul is not leading a communion service aboard the ship. Most of the participants would have had no way to make any connection to this meal as a celebration of the death and resurrection of Jesus. Luke’s intent is that we, he readers who have been instructed in the gospel, make that connection. Celebrating Holy Communion in the midst of the storms of life is a wonderful thing to do. But that is likely not the case aboard the ship – Paul is rather simply attempting to bring courage and hope to his fellow travelers – two hundred and seventy-six in all! This is a good example of how Biblical writers can often take experiences that on their own have one meaning and, by “tweaking” the story just a bit, fill them with new meaning for those who read the story. Luke is a brilliant writer. He knows how to turn a sentence in a way that brings more than one meaning into play. Luke was not simply interested in providing his readers with interesting details but in helping them as they face the storms of life. We can take delight in the wonderful work of Luke.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, August 28, 2013 Read – Acts 27:27-32 Two weeks into the fateful voyage and likely still wallowing in despair, Luke tells us the sailor begin to suspect that they are nearing land. When they measure the depth of the sea they discover that this is exactly the case – and now another danger swells up. Will the ship crash into the land and be destroyed? In desperation the sailors lower the anchors from the rear of the boat and begin to pray in earnest. The saying, “There are no atheists in foxholes” is so true. One is reminded again of the story of Jonah where we are told that the pagan sailors are praying fervently only to find Jonah asleep in the depths of the ship – they plead with him to get up and pray to his God. Of course in the Jonah story Jonah knows why the storm is raging and that the only solution is to cast Jonah into the sea. The sailors do that and the author of the book of Jonah tells us they begin to believe in Jonah’s God. This story does not follow that pattern. The sailors may be praying but they are also looking out for their own skins. They attempt to flee from the ship and make their way as best they can to land, leaving the passengers to fend for themselves. Once again it is Paul who sees through their design and warns the centurion that unless they remain with the boat they will lose their lives. One is reminded of the saying of Jesus, “Whoever seeks to save their life will lose it and whoever loses their life will save it.” The disappointed sailors are not able to flee as the “get-away” boat is cut loose and sent out onto the waves.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, August 27, 2013 Read – Acts 27:21-26 In the midst of utter despair Luke tells us that Paul proclaims a word of encouragement. This is not just wishful thinking. Luke tells us that an angel of God “stood by” Paul during the night and brought him the assuring news that Paul and his companions would not perish. Paul’s destiny was not at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea but before the Emperor in Rome. While it was perhaps merely common sense that motivated Paul to suggest that they not leave the harbor of Fair Haven for the harbor of Phoenix, this declaration by Paul is a prophetic word. Again, we are at a loss to explain how and angel of God stood by Paul or for that matter exactly how God speaks to any of us. We have contemplated that before and it is always an ambiguous task. If there were readers who were wondering whether perhaps nature would do what neither Jews nor Romans could do – keep Paul from Rome – all wonder is now gone. Paul will arrive in Rome. Paul had said earlier that he thought there would be loss of the cargo and lives if the journey went forward from Fair Haven. Now he is told by the angel that God will spare the lives of all those aboard – only the ship will be lost, run aground on some island. We might wonder how people on board reacted to Paul’s words. Luke does not tell us. Likely the reaction was mixed. Perhaps some took hope in Paul’s words. Likely others paid little or no attention to him. Luke’s first readers were encouraged to take courage from the story. God does provide. We can take the same courage as we hear this story and as we live through the storms of life.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, August 26, 2013 Read – Acts 27:13-20 The plan to get to the harbor at Phoenix and spend the winter there fails. Luke tells us a storm called the Northeaster engulfs the ship and they are driven off course. Paul had told them that if they did not listen to him the result would be great loss of cargo and even lives. Soon the sailors begin to throw the cargo into the sea. Paul was right. Again it seems Luke wants his readers to recognize Paul’s ability to prophesy. As the story comes to a conclusion however it turns out that there is no loss of life – Paul is given that promise by God. Perhaps it is better to think of all this advice given by Paul as exactly that – Paul’s common sense. The story reminds readers of Acts of the story of Jonah. In that story too, the winds of a violent storm drive Jonah and the sailors along with him out into the midst of the Mediterranean Sea. They begin to throw the cargo overboard in that story too. And eventually it is Jonah who is thrown into the sea. There are certainly differences between the story of Jonah and this story but it is not a bad thing for readers of Acts to be thinking about that other sea voyage. In fact there are a number of sea voyages that might come to mind – some of them in the Bible and others not. The stories of Jesus out on the Sea of Galilee come to mind. So does the story of Noah and his family during the flood. And there are a few Psalms, particularly Psalm 107 that may be helpful to remember. And of course the great sea voyage of Odysseus is worth some thought. Eventually the storm becomes so violent that all hope is lost. Because the sailors could not see the sun or the moon for several days they had no idea where they were. Readers of Acts can feel the despair begin to settle in for the voyagers. And one begins to wonder if the power of nature will do what Jews and Romans could not – prevent Paul from arriving at Rome. Those who have read Luke’s gospel and the book of Acts to this point know that cannot happen. God is in control. The Spirit is directing the journey. Luke’s first readers likely were living in a time when it was more difficult to be a Christian than it is for any of us. Their lives may have felt as if they were being tossed to and fro on the winds of the sea. This story may well have given them hope. This story can give any of us hope as we find ourselves in the storms of life. Luke, the master storyteller, is weaving a story that informs and inspires his readers. It is good to just enjoy the story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, August 25, 2013 Read – Acts 27:1-12 Luke does not tell us how much time passed between the time of Paul’s hearing before King Agrippa and his departure to Rome. We will recall that both King Agrippa and Procius Festus had declared Paul innocent. Yet, they are intent on sending Paul to appear before the emperor because of Paul’s appeal to do so. As readers of Luke’s gospel we also know that Paul is travelling to Rome because God has set his destiny to do so (Acts 23:11). The opinions of kings and rulers ultimately do not matter. Yet, readers are left wondering what Festus finally decided to write as the charges against Paul. Luke never tells us. The Roman centurion who is put in charge of Paul is described by Luke as an honorable man. He will remain so during the whole journey. Readers of Acts are reminded of Cornelius, another centurion who became a Christian (Acts 10). Luke does not tell us that Julius becomes a Christian – there are good and honorable people who are not Christians. Perhaps Julius was one of them. Luke also tells us that a man by the name of Aristarchus from Macedonia accompanies Paul on the voyage. Aristarchus was one of the people who accompanied Paul on his final journey to Jerusalem – likely he was one of the people who were chosen to assure that the offering Paul had collected for the poor in Jerusalem was properly delivered. We are left to wonder if Aristarchus was also a prisoner – though we are given no reason to believe that he was. He was likely on this journey by his own volition – perhaps designated by the friends of Paul to that role or more likely he was simply committed to Paul and cared about his safety and so he went along. There is one more person on this journey – the same unnamed person who we have encountered on the other sea voyages. Luke begins to use the pronoun “we” once again. We had last encountered this person at least two years prior to this time when Paul arrived in Jerusalem in about 57 AD. I have speculated before that perhaps the author of Acts really was present during these sea voyages as an acquaintance of Paul. Others have suggested other theories about Luke’s use of the pronoun “we” and we will never be sure what the truth is. In the end it really does not matter much. The detailed itinerary and a few other specific details do suggest that even if the “we passages” come from a source used by Luke that the author of that source was along on the journey. Some have suggested that Aristarchus is the “we source.” Perhaps that could be true, however then one would need to go back and explain how Aristarchus was at Troas before Paul’s first missionary venture to Macedonia, which was Aristarchus’ home. He would have needed to be away from home and become a companion of Paul before the vision of Paul at Troas through which Paul was led to Philippi and eventually to Thessalonica where Aristarchus was from. Nothing is impossible. And all of this does point out the speculative nature of all attempts to identify unnamed people. We will never really know who is behind the “we” passages. Luke does provide us with some historical data that helps us to understand the time of year when all of this is taking place. Luke says the Fast had already gone by (Acts 27:9). The Fast Luke is talking about is the Day of Atonement which would have been in the fall – late September or early October. Shipping season in the northern Mediterranean ends by November and does not begin again until March. Luke does not say exactly how much time has passed but the implication is that the journey will be very dangerous if they proceed. It appears that everyone is basically in agreement about that – the only question is which harbor will be the safest for spending the winter. Paul is on the losing side when a vote is taken. The group hopes to get to a harbor in Phoenix on the island of Crete. One wonders what kind of sea captain would poll his passengers about a judgment the sea captain only ought to make. Perhaps Luke is using this scene to lift up the ability of Paul to foresee the future – he will make more specific prophecies later on in the story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, August 24, 2013 Read – Acts 26:19-32 Paul concludes his defense by testifying to King Agrippa that he was not “disobedient to the heavenly vision” but rather that he had been faithful to the one who called him proclaiming a message of repentance first in Damascus and then in Jerusalem and Judea and to the Gentiles. The word repentance has less to do with feeling sorry for something than it does with a change of mind. To repent is to change one’s mind. That is Paul’s plea and that is Paul’s hope for all who hear what he has to say. Paul’s message is a message that comes fully out of the scripture of the OT – he teaches “nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would take place: that the Messiah should suffer, and that, by being the first to rise from the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles” (Acts 26:22-23). Once again Paul includes himself within Judaism by referring to “our” people. Without using the exact words Paul rehearses the core message of the speeches of Acts – “This Jesus who was crucified, God raised from the dead, so that repentance and forgiveness of sins might be proclaimed in his name.” Certainly this core message is at the heart of his testimony and at the center of his defense of the Christian faith. Paul tells King Agrippa that it is for this reason that Paul was seized by the Jews in the Temple – and yet God has helped him to this day. Jesus had said of his followers that they would bear witness before kings and rulers. That is what Paul has now done before King Agrippa and Porcius Festus, the Roman ruler. Once again the parallels with the story of Jesus become evident – Jesus testified before the Roman Pontius Pilate and the Jewish Herod Antipas. Readers of Luke remember that it is only Luke that tells of the episode of Jesus before Herod. What will be the result of Paul’s testimony? Porcius Festus passes Paul off as one crazed by too much learning. He is not convinced. Paul’s response to Festus is short – there is not much else to say and in the process of responding to his accusation that Paul is crazy, he turns again to King Agrippa who is really the one to whom Paul is making his plea. Paul reminds King Agrippa that surely he is not unaware of everything that has taken place. King Agrippa is not ignorant of the events surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus – and of the proclamation of those who follow Jesus that God raised him from the dead. Paul confronts King Agrippa with a question that must have taken him off guard – “do you believe the prophets?” and, before King Agrippa can answer, Paul says, “I know that you believe.” What was King Agrippa to say? His response is likely on the sarcastic side – “Are you so quickly persuading me to become a Christian?” Paul is deadly serious when he responds to King Agrippa that that is exactly his hope and the hope he has for all who hear what he has to say. King Agrippa is not convinced – but he is also not able to refute Paul. The scene ends as King Agrippa, Bernice and the other rise to leave. Paul has stated his case. King Agrippa and Porcius Festus along with others have heard. Now it will be up to the work of God’s Spirit whether or not they will heed the words of Paul. History will demonstrate that they did not – but Paul has done all he can. Significantly, as King Agrippa and the others leave they are heard saying to one another, “This man is doing nothing to deserve death or imprisonment” (Acts 26:31). This is the second time that Paul has been declared innocent. He has now been declared innocent by the Roman ruler, Porcius Festus, and the Jewish king, Herod Agrippa – just as Jesus was declared innocent by Pontius Pilate and Herod Antipas. The parallels continue. Porcius Festus still has nothing to write about the charge against Paul. One might expect that Paul would now be set free. But Roman justice is not served! And King Agrippa appears to turn the blame squarely on Paul – “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to the emperor” (Acts 26:32). How intent we all are to justify ourselves! It is now Paul’s fault that he is in custody and that he will be sent as a prisoner to Rome. I suppose that thought might have made King Agrippa feel better – but it was not true. Of course on a much deeper level God was acting in all of this. It was God who was bringing Paul to Rome. Human action cannot thwart the will of God. In fact, God uses even corrupt human action to bring about his work. This is not a story that is being controlled and driven by human rulers like Porcius Festus or King Agrippa. All along this is a story that has been guided by the Spirit of God.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, August 23, 2013 Read – Acts 26:12-18 Paul now turns to his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus Road. This is the third time Luke has told us about this encounter which highlights its importance in the story. We have noticed how the story has gone through a progression. Here the story is considerably shorter than the previous two versions. There is no mention of whether or not Paul’s companions saw anything or heard anything. There is no mention of Paul being blinded by the experience. There is no mention of Ananias. The call of Jesus comes directly to Paul – something that matches much more closely with Paul’s own view of his call by Jesus. Jesus is fully in control of this encounter. And in the encounter Paul is given the purpose for which Jesus has appeared to him. Paul is appointed to testify to the things in which he has seen Jesus. God has promised to rescue Paul from Jews and Gentiles who will oppose him, and Paul is the vehicle through whom God intends to “open the eyes of many so they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in Jesus” (Acts 26:18). The word that Luke uses to refer to the “forgiveness of sins” is better translated “release from sins” – it is to be set free. The very Jesus that Paul once sought to destroy is now at the center of Paul’s understanding of what it means to be a Jew. This does not mean however that Paul was now abandoning Judaism. Jesus was a Jew – he was the Jewish Messiah. And now Paul would testify that to follow Jesus was the proper expression of Judaism. This is the hope for which Paul had always longed. This was the hope of Israel! There was a change of mind and heart for Paul but not a change of religion. That will become clear as we continue to hear his witness.

Weekly Announcements Aug 25 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, August 22, 2013 Read – Acts 26:1-11 The proceedings begin with King Agrippa inviting Paul to speak openly. And so begins the final of five speeches by Paul in the book of Acts. This may be the most important of all the speeches. It is more than just a defense of Paul it is a statement of the case for the Christian faith. As we listen to Paul’s speech, we need to remind ourselves that, like all the others, this is most likely not a “verbatim” speech. It is a speech typical of what should be said as anyone attempts to defend the faith. To be sure some things are particular to Paul, and Luke would expect that others would provide similar details from their own experience, but the core of the speech is Luke’s concept of the defense of the Christian faith before the world. Paul begins with just a bit of flattery in considering himself fortunate that it is before King Agrippa that Paul must speak and not some lesser person. On the other hand, it is appropriate that Paul should be making his defense before one who is both powerful in the Roman world and well acquainted with the “customs and controversies of the Jews” (Acts 26:3). Having gotten the pleasantries out of the way, Paul begins in earnest by providing the story of his early life, a story that any well-meaning Jew would know to be true. Once again it is important that we hear that Paul is placing himself squarely in the center of Judaism – he is a Jew! He speaks of the Jews as “my own people” and of himself as a member of the Pharisees sect, the strictest sect of “our” religion. Once again Paul maintains that anyone ought to be able to testify on his behalf about this. Paul maintains that he is on trial on account of his hope in the promises of God made to “our” ancestors, a promise that “our” twelve tribes hope to attain. Paul, the Christian Paul, is not an outsider! He belongs to the people of Israel! From the days of his youth as a member of the sect of Pharisees he believed that God had the power to raise the dead – that is the hope for which he is now on trial. It is crucial that we understand that Paul did not think of himself as no longer being a Jew. Yes, he was a Christian Jew, but that did not make him any less a Jew. That is why it is important that we refrain from using language of conversion when we speak of Paul – he was not converted from one religion to another! Paul did need to think in a different and new way. Paul tells us that he was convinced that it was God’s will that he do whatever he could “against the name of Jesus of Nazareth” (Acts 26:9). Paul thought that followers of Jesus were perverting the Jewish faith – they were a danger to the faith that Paul so dearly loved and to which he was fully committed. And that is what Paul did in Jerusalem and even in foreign cities. Paul speaks of his persecution of Christians, but from the point of view that he was not a persecutor but a protector of Judaism. The Paul we meet in this part of the story is not someone who is struggling with a guilty conscience or who doubts his actions. He is zealous for the faith! He was a defender of Judaism!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, August 21, 2013 Read – Acts 25:13-27 We have been introduced briefly to Bernice and King (Herod) Agrippa. They are the sister and brother of Drusilla who was the wife of Felix, the predecessor of Festus. Like their sister Drusilla, theirs is an intriguing tale. King Agrippa was the son of the first Herod Agrippa who had been king from 40-44 AD. When his father died he was still too young to inherit his throne, but in a few years the Romans promoted him to the office of king like his father. King Agrippa would have been the great-grandson of Herod the Great, the awful king of the Jews who was reigning when Jesus was born. Like his great-grandfather before him, King Agrippa was fiercely loyal to Rome. He was king during the tragic Jewish revolt of 66-70 AD and put his army at the disposal of the Roman generals, Vespasian and Titus, during the war. His armies were commanded to participate in the invasion against Jerusalem and the siege that ended with the destruction of the Temple along with much of the city. The story about his sister, Bernice, is even more intriguing. First of all, if rumor in Rome is to be understood to be correct, Bernice and King Agrippa were involved in an incestuous relationship after she divorced her husband. Likely the rumors were true. At the time when Paul would have appeared before them, they were living together. In the years following the Jewish revolt, Bernice became the mistress and lover of Titus, the Roman general who was in charge at the end of the Jewish revolt. Titus was the oldest son of Vespasian who had been the Roman general sent to Judea by Emperor Nero to quell the uprising of the Jews in 66 AD. When Nero committed suicide in 68 AD, Vespasian eventually became the Roman emperor after three other Romans held the office for only a few months each. When Vespasian became the emperor in 69 AD, Titus took over the role of general in the war against the Jews. It was at this time that he and Bernice became lovers. When Titus ascended to the role of Emperor following the death of his father, Vespasian, the relationship between Bernice and Titus ended, or perhaps went underground since it was just too scandalous to defend such an arrangement. Luke spares us all these details (we learn them mostly from Josephus and the Roman historians of the time) but it is important for us to be aware of all of this since it does add a certain insight into what was happening. When we hear of people like Drusilla and Bernice and King Agrippa, we are dealing with “high flying” characters whose lives resembled a soap opera. Paul was not appearing before good and well-meaning folks. Luke tells us that Bernice and King Agrippa came to pay a visit to the new procurator which is likely a historical fact. The occasion provides the puzzled Festus an opportunity to ask someone else in authority how he should handle the strange case of Paul. As Festus summarizes the case against Paul, it becomes clear that the Jews from Jerusalem have not brought any charge against Paul that should merit a guilty verdict. Festus gets right to the heart of the matter. They have not made any of the charges that Festus was expecting to hear (Acts 25:18). Instead, their charges are really internal disputes within the Jewish religion. This is the very argument that Luke has been maintaining all along. Christianity is not a new or different religion, but rather the proper understanding of Judaism. Internal disputes within the Jewish religion are not something the Romans either cared to deal with or had the authority to deal with. This is a Jewish problem. Festus tells King Agrippa and Bernice that at the heart of the issue is a dispute about Jesus. The accusing Jews from Jerusalem claim that Jesus is dead. Paul, also a Jew, claims that Jesus is alive. At the heart of the matter is the question of the resurrection of the dead – and now more particularly the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. That is precisely the issue! Is Jesus the crucified messiah who God raised from the dead and made Lord and ruler of all? Or, is Jesus just a man who was killed long ago by Pontius Pilate as an insurrectionist and whose deluded followers somehow claim to be alive? These are not questions of Roman law for Festus to answer and provide a verdict. Festus goes on to tell of his plan to send Paul to Jerusalem in hopes of resolving the issue, and of Paul’s appeal to be sent to the emperor. As we will soon hear, this created a dilemma for Festus. What should be the charge against Paul? King Agrippa agrees to hear from Paul himself the next day. It is clearly with tongue in cheek that Luke writes of the grand entrance of Bernice and King Agrippa. Luke’s readers must surely have smiled at the silliness of such an entry with all the pomp and circumstances involved. That’s especially true when we recall the information that Josephus and the historians provide. Luke’s first audience would have been living right in the midst of those times. What a spectacle! What a farce! Luke contrasts the ridiculous entrance of King Agrippa with the simple dignity of Paul as he is brought before the assembled group. We have known all along that the Roman procurators have found Paul to be not guilty of the crimes of which he is accused. For the first time, Festus makes the declaration that he had “found that he had done nothing deserving death” (Acts 25:25). This is the first of three such declarations. Readers of Luke will remember that on at least three occasions Jesus was also officially declared to be not guilty. We need to recall that Luke has been telling the story of Paul in parallel to the story he earlier told about Jesus. Festus also clearly states the dilemma he is dealing with regarding his inability to state the charges for which he is sending Paul to be tried by the emperor. It would be ridiculous to send a man to stand before the emperor who is charged with no offense. Festus hopes that at the end of the proceedings he will finally have something to write indicating exactly the charges against Paul. He is also hoping that Agrippa will help provide the answer.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, August 20, 2013 Read – Acts 25:1-12 According to Josephus, Porcius Festus was a more just ruler than Felix had been. Unfortunately he was procurator for only about two or three years. He likely became the procurator in 59 or 60 AD. He died in 62AD. Luke does not tell us this part of the story, but in the interval between the replacement of Festus by his successor, the high priest Ananias had James, the brother of Jesus, executed. This happened in 62 AD. One can only wonder why Luke chose not to tell that part of the story. As we have noticed, after Paul’s arrest the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem, among whom James, the brother of Jesus, would have been the leader, disappear from Luke’s story. It is quite obvious that there was worry and concern among the Jewish Christians when Paul arrived in Jerusalem in about 57 or 58 AD. James, the brother of Jesus, and others are anxious. Perhaps the undercurrents are swelling far more dangerously than we may imagine. The Jewish revolt in 66 AD was only a few years in the future. The harmonious relationship between Jewish Christians and non-Christian Jews that Luke so much desired and wanted to portray may not have been so harmonious after all. Perhaps Christian Jews were being questioned about their loyalty – a good reason why James would want Paul to display his “zealous” Jewish best. Of course we can only speculate and wonder about what it really was like to live in Jerusalem in those days leading up to the Jewish revolt in 66 AD. Josephus does provide us with some interesting insights into that chaotic and terrible time. We could wish that Luke would have told us more than he did. Peter had disappeared from Luke’s story following the Jerusalem conference (Acts 15) and now all the others in Jerusalem – the authenticating Apostleship so important in the early parts of Luke’s story – have also disappeared. We can only wonder why Luke chose not to tell us “the rest of the story” about any of them. As we come to the end of the book of Acts a question that we will need to ponder is why Luke ended his book as he did. We will come to that in due time. Luke tells us that when Festus arrived in Caesarea he wasted no time before he visited Jerusalem, the most important city in his district. It is likely that there were many things to discuss, but Luke tells us only of the conversation that Festus had with the chief priests and the leaders about Paul. From the way in which Luke tells the story, this was the most important thing on their minds. With a new procurator in place, they appeal to have Paul brought back to Jerusalem, pretending that they will provide him a fair trial there. Luke tells his readers that they have other plans. Those plans are to murder Paul on the way. One is reminded of the men who vowed not to eat until Paul is dead. Are we to imagine that they are still fasting? Luke’s creative genius as a writer is again on display. Festus does not provide a reason but foils the plot of the chief priests and would-be assassins of Paul by telling them that Paul will be tried in Caesarea and that he is returning their shortly. If they want to press the case they can do it there. In a little over a week the scene shifts back to Caesarea and a shortened version of the same trial that took place before Felix unfolds. Luke only tells us that the chief priests brought serious charges against Paul but does not document what those charges were. Paul, in his defense, will provide some of that detail, and the reader is left to conclude that the trial before Festus is a repeat of the trial before Felix. The case against Paul is not made. But Festus proves no more just in providing a verdict than his predecessor, Felix. In a move that would have taken Festus off the hook, he asks Paul if he would like to return to Jerusalem to be tried there. This would be the third time Paul would face the same charges even though on the previous two occasions he was not found guilty. He was also not acquitted by Roman rulers who knew he was innocent. Festus wanted it both ways – he could not condemn Paul, but he also knew that Paul would likely be killed if he returned to Jerusalem. Festus likely figured he would let the Jews do the dirty work and be done with this pest. Paul refused to take the bait. If he cannot receive the justice he has coming in the court of the Roman procurator in Caesarea, he has no choice but to appeal to a higher court, the emperor in Rome. Paul proclaims his innocence once again – an innocence that Paul reminds Festus that Festus knows very well to be true. Festus will not get off the hook so easily. Paul’s appeal to be sent to Rome opens up the story in a new way. From this point on, the Jewish accusers of Paul who are from Jerusalem disappear from the story. They will not be heard from again. Readers of the book of Acts know, of course, that Paul will arrive in Rome. God had promised that Paul would stand before the emperor, and God’s promises will be fulfilled. Paul’s appeal to be tried before the emperor is the vehicle by which Paul will arrive in Rome. We might imagine that the journey to Rome would happen very quickly and that this would be the next thing that Luke will tell us. That is not the case. There is one more fascinating story to tell – the hearing of Paul before Herod Agrippa, who was the king of the Jews at that time. This will provide Luke one more chance to place before his readers one more speech by Paul. While it is not the last thing that Paul will say, it is the last major speech and becomes Paul’s final defense of the Christian faith.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, August 19, 2013 Read – Acts 23:24-27 Luke now provides a fascinating piece of information to his readers. Felix’s wife is a woman named Drusilla. Luke tells us she is a Jew, but there is far more to say about her. We learn from Josephus that Drusilla is Felix’s third wife. His first wife had been the grand-daughter of Antony and Cleopatra. His second wife was unknown to Josephus. At the time Felix married Drusilla, he was about 55 years old – she was 16. She was also the daughter of Herod Agrippa, the king who had ruled over Judea, Samaria, and Galilee from about 40-44 AD. This Herod was the one who failed to renounce the claim of the people that he was a god and was struck down by God for his arrogance. As we will learn shortly, Drusilla was the sister of two other characters who will appear in Luke’s story, Bernice and Herod Agrippa the second, both also children of Herod Agrippa the first. (Again, there are just too many Herods!) All of this adds intrigue to the story. It is a real soap opera in some ways. All of this helps us to grasp the interwoven relationship between the Romans and the Jews – at least at the higher political levels. This is not a clean little story of well minded people. It is a tragic, complex, and fascinating story of intrigue at the highest levels and how all of that influenced the lives of both Jews and Christians. Luke tells us that Felix and Drusilla were delighted to enter often into conversation with Paul. It is a story that sounds something like the story Mark tells us of Herod Antipas delighting in listening to John the Baptist when he was in prison (Mark 6:20) – a story Luke dropped out of his gospel at this point even though he was otherwise following Mark’s story. Luke tells us that Felix both feared and could not resist talking to Paul. Of course Luke also tells us that Felix hoped to receive a bribe from Paul or Paul’s friends which reveals the sinister and corrupt ruler Felix really was. Josephus and Tacitus likely were correct in their descriptions of Felix. One can only wonder how conversations about “justice, self-control, and the coming judgment” went between Paul, Drusilla, and Felix. Luke tells us two years passed by before Felix was replaced by the next procurator, Porcius Festus. In the Roman legal system, the statute of limitations for a crime was two years. For a second time Roman justice should have led Felix to free Paul. First his accusers failed to appear and now the statute of limitations had expired. Felix does not provide justice for Paul. Instead he plays his hand toward the Jews by granting them the favor of leaving Paul in prison. Luke is building a case for the innocence of Paul – just as he built the case for the innocence of Jesus. Neither was guilty of the crimes they were accused of committing, and neither received the Roman justice they deserved. Readers of Luke’s gospel will recall that three times Pontius Pilate declared Jesus to be innocent, and at the point of his death the centurion declares, “Truly this man was innocent” (Luke 23:47)! Perhaps Luke’s first readers were suffering persecution and part of Luke’s reason for writing his gospel was to argue that they are innocent too.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, August 18, 2013 Read – Acts 24:1-23 The hearing before Felix takes place five days later when the high priest Ananias and other Jews come down from Jerusalem to Caesarea. The hearing consists of two speeches – one by the chief spokesman of the Jews, Tertullus, who was a skilled attorney, and the other by Paul. Tertullus speaks first. His speech is dripping with flattery, a flattery that becomes even more distasteful when one considers the appraisal of Felix by Josephus and Tacitus. Felix was far from honorable but Tertullus will paint him in glowing colors. Having “buttered him up” Tertullus gets to the charges against Paul. They are now couched in political tones. Paul is a “pestilent fellow”, a troublemaker who has been agitating rebellion throughout the world. He is thus an insurrectionist, the penalty for which is death. Paul is also the “ringleader” of the sect known as the Nazarenes. Exactly what that might have meant to Felix from a political point of view is unknown. Perhaps there is meaning in the “label” Nazarene that his slipped out of reach in the passing of history. The third charge is also a political one since Paul is accused of profaning the Temple, a capital offense in Roman law. Tertullus is not ashamed of lying. He claims that his present accusers caught Paul in the act and seized him “red handed” in his crime. Of course that was not the case – it was Jews from Asia who brought the word to the authorities in Jerusalem, and Paul was apprehended as he prayed alone in the Temple. Tertullus closes his accusations with the boast that if Felix will “examine” Paul – which may have been the suggestion of applying torture to him – Felix will get the truth out of him. Paul is next to speak. His words are calm and cheerful. There is no “buttering up” of Felix, only the reminder that Felix has ruled for a long time and that Paul looks forward to making his defense before such an experienced judge. If Felix cares to examine the facts he will discover that Paul had been in Jerusalem for only a short time, twelve days, and that Paul had not disputed with anyone in Jerusalem. He came to worship God. What Paul admits to is only that he is a Jew who “worships the God of our ancestors, believing everything laid down according to the law or written in the prophets.” Paul confesses that he has a “hope in God” – a hope that his accusers also accept – “that there will be a resurrection both of the righteous and the unrighteous. Therefore I do my best always to have a clear conscience toward God and all people. Now after some years I came to bring alms to my nation and to offer sacrifices. While I was doing this they found me in the Temple, completing the rite of purification, without any crowd or disturbance” (Acts 23:14-18). Paul was only being a faithful Jew – yes, a Jew who follows the Way, but an impeccably faithful Jew none the less. As Luke, through James, the brother of Jesus, would put it, Paul is “a Jew, zealous for the law!” It is interesting that Paul does not mention Jesus. Perhaps admitting that he belonged to the “Way” was enough to make it clear that he was a follower of Jesus, but one wonders why Jesus is not a part of Paul’s defense. We have seen earlier that Paul has made “the resurrection of the dead” the main issue in the debate. That emphasis continues here. Paul also mentions that he has come to bring “alms to my nation”, a reference most likely to the collection for the poor in Jerusalem that was so important to Paul and is the main motive for his Jerusalem visit according to his letters. We have noted earlier that Luke has all but ignored Paul’s offering for the poor. Likely Luke was far more aware of the importance of the collection for the poor than he lets on in the book of Acts. Once again it is important to notice that Paul says, “alms to my nation,” – he does not say “your nation”, or “their nation”, but is stating clearly that he considers himself to be a Jew. Paul goes on to point out that it was “Jews from Asia” who actually incited the trouble. They are not present. Roman law said that a man had a right to face his accusers and Paul’s accusers have disappeared. Felix should have simply thrown the case out of court, but he does not. Roman justice is not provided by Felix. Paul is guilty of none of the crimes of which he has been accused. His only fault is that he is a believer “in the resurrection of the dead”, something that he shared with the Pharisees as we have discovered earlier. There is no crime here, only a dispute about religious belief. Luke now tells us that Felix was actually well informed about the “Way” and simply adjourns the hearing without a verdict. Exactly how Felix has become so informed is not revealed by Luke. When we remember that at least 25 years have passed since the death and resurrection of Jesus, and also that Cornelius, a Roman centurion who lived in Caesarea, had become a “follower of the Way” some years earlier, it is possible that there was a thriving Christian community in Caesarea. Felix may have had some experience with them and found them harmless from the point of view of his Roman rule. Of course all of that is speculation. As we have said, Felix simply adjourns the hearing without a verdict but promising that he will decide the case when the tribune, Lysias, arrives. Paul remains in custody though he is granted at least the freedom of being cared for by his friends.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, August 17, 2013 Read – Acts 23:23-35 In the middle of the night Paul is moved out of Jerusalem to safer territory at Caesarea on the Mediterranean Sea, the Roman capital of the territory. Luke tells us that the tribune used half of his army to secure the move! Obviously they did not quietly slip out of town. At this point we learn both the identity of the tribune, Claudius Lysias, and the Roman procurator, or governor at Caesarea, Felix. Josephus goes to great lengths in his description of Antonius Felix. He had once been a slave who was freed by Antonia, the mother of the emperor Claudius. Tacitus, the Roman historian says of Felix that he “exercised the power of a king with the mind of a slave” – and Josephus placed most of the blame for the Jewish revolt in 66 AD on the inept leadership of Felix. He was a brutal ruler – much like Pontius Pilate had been. He became Procurator of Judea in about 52 or 53 AD and ruled until about 59 or 60 AD. All of this helps to date the story of Paul since Paul appeared before him and remained in custody for two years while Felix was procurator. He was finally sent to Rome by Felix’s successor, Festus, who began to reign in about 59 or 60 AD. The date of Paul’s visit to Jerusalem was thus about 57 AD or so. The events that unfolded in the story we have been reading took place at least 25 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus as we have noted earlier. Luke does not portray Felix in as negative a light as either Josephus or Tacitus, though he will tell his readers that Felix kept Paul in prison long after he had determined that he was innocent, hoping to receive a bribe from Paul to gain his freedom – no bribe is given. At this point Luke simply tells us that Felix decides to give Paul a hearing once his accusers have arrived from Jerusalem.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, August 16, 2013 Read – Acts 23:12-22 The morning light brings more intrigue to Luke’s unfolding story. A plot is uncovered regarding an attempt to kill Paul. The strategy is to make the tribune believe that overnight tempers have cooled and now everyone finally wants to get to the bottom of all of this controversy surrounding Paul. The plot is sinister. Unknown to the tribune and to Paul, a group of men have vowed to kill Paul by stabbing him as he is led to the hearing. Once again Luke is reflecting historical reality. Josephus tells his readers of a group of Jewish radicals that emerged at about this time in history known as the sicarii. The word “sicarii” means a small knife that can be easily hid under a person’s outer garment. Josephus tells of many prominent people who were publically killed in this way. The knifeman would slip up next to his victim in the crowd, stab him with his sicarii, and then disappear into the crowd in the chaos that would occur. All of this was part of the tragic build-up to the Jewish revolt in 66 AD. Luke is likely aware of this method of murder. His story has much historical plausibility. Fortunately for Paul the plot is uncovered. We learn more about Paul from Luke – a piece of information only Luke reveals. Paul has a sister who has a small son. Apart from this brief reference in the book of Acts, these two are unknown to history. Paul never mentions them. Paul’s nephew provides information to the tribune of the plot to kill Paul. The story is filled with intrigue and suspense. For a fourth time the Romans come to Paul’s rescue. And readers of Acts are left wondering how the men who have plotted against Paul will resolve the vow they have taken not to eat until Paul has been murdered – will they break their vow to God, or starve?

Weekly Announcements Aug 18 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, August 15, 2013 Read – Acts 22:30-23:11 The next day the tribune released Paul and ordered the chief priests and the whole council to gather for a meeting. In truth, the tribune did not have the authority to call a meeting of the Sanhedrin, however, one might think of this as an informal hearing. Certainly they did not meet in a formal way in the Temple because that would have made the Jews impure. Paul begins his speech where it was cut off the previous day, once again attempting to make connection with his audience by calling them “brothers” and claiming that his conscience is clear before God. The Jewish authorities will have none of it. Luke tells us the high priest, Ananias (clearly not the Ananias from earlier in the story) ordered Paul to be struck on the mouth. Again Luke has his general historical facts in place – the high priest at this time was indeed named Ananias. The meaning of his actions in ordering Paul to be struck on the mouth is not clear. Paul’s reaction is classic Paul – fiery and bold. While the author of Acts most likely was not a close associate or co-worker with Paul, he does know some things about Paul, and one of them was Paul’s fiery temper. Paul’s words are both fiery and an accurate prediction. The high priest Ananias was struck down during the Jewish revolt from 66-70 AD and murdered by the people of Jerusalem for collaborating with the Romans. But Paul’s words also appear to get him into trouble. Those around the high priest jump on Paul’s fiery words and accuse him of insulting the leader of God’s people and breaking the law – a commandment written in Exodus 22:28 – “You shall not revile God or curse a leader of your people.” Paul pleads ignorance regarding the identity of the high priest. The whole episode is one more way for Luke to tell his readers that Paul is a law abiding observant Jew. Once again his credentials as a Jew, zealous for the law, are impeccable. At this point Paul cleverly changes the subject. He takes notice that the Sanhedrin is made up of some who are Sadducees and others who are Pharisees. Paul makes the main issue of his defense speech the question of the resurrection of the dead. Paul knows that the Sadducees do not believe in the resurrection of the dead, but the Pharisees do. This is a historical fact borne out by Josephus and others. Luke description of Sadducees and Pharisees is exactly correct and matches Josephus description perfectly – “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge all three” (Acts 23: 8). It is important once again that we hear how Luke puts this. Paul does not say, “I was a Pharisee,” but rather he says, “I am a Pharisee” (Acts 23:6)! This is not mere strategy on Paul’s part. As far as Luke is concerned Paul always remains a Jew. Paul would have claimed the same thing. Paul was a Christian Jew, but he was none the less first of all a Jew. Paul identifies with Pharisaic Judaism which did believe in the resurrection of the dead. The dispute at hand was fully within the confines of Judaism – it is not a dispute between Christians and Jews. Of course, Paul likely had far more in mind with respect to the resurrection of the dead than the Pharisees in his audience did. But Paul does not bring the resurrection of Jesus into the picture here. He is content to let the question of the resurrection of the dead in general be the main issue. Paul’s plan of action works. In what might seem like an impossible outcome, Paul receives an acquittal from the Pharisees at the meeting – “We find nothing wrong with this man!” they say (Acts 23:9). What a strange thing to hear. We need to remember that throughout his gospel and the book of Acts Luke has been portraying the Pharisees in a favorable light. From Luke’s point of view, the distance between a Jewish Christian and a Pharisee is not very great. Did Luke have hopes that the emerging Christianity of his time and Pharisaic Judaism, which was the only form of Judaism besides Christian Judaism to survive the Jewish war, might someday, somehow come back together? Was that one of his motives for writing the book of Acts? We can only speculate about those questions. At any rate, once again the Pharisees are portrayed by Luke in a positive way. With the Pharisees now on his side, at least with respect to the resurrection of the dead, the suspense in the story grows. Will this all work out for good for Paul? Before the thought has even settled into the minds of Luke’s readers, we hear that such a commotion arises that Paul has to be rescued for a third time by the Romans. Paul is nearly torn in two. Safely inside the Roman barracks, Paul is granted another vision during the night. God has already told Paul that he must go to Rome and witness there. That promise is renewed. Paul’s fate will not be to die in Jerusalem as Jesus did – or as Stephen did. His destiny is elsewhere. As we reflect back over the past few days’ readings, we discover Luke’s model speech of how a follower of Jesus is to proclaim the gospel to a Jewish audience. Paul is polite and honorable. He makes every effort to identify with his Jewish audience. He and they share a great common heritage, and Paul builds on that heritage. Having found as much common ground as is possible, Paul invites his Jewish brothers and sisters to consider his story about his encounter with Jesus and invites them to share in that encounter. Was the speech effective? Likely the same outcome as we have witnessed throughout the book of Acts unfolds – some believe, others don’t. We can learn from Paul’s speech how we might attempt to encounter others in our world. Luke is an evangelist first and foremost. His goal is to help followers of Jesus bear witness to the hope that is within them. More is going on than just the telling of a story. Witness to the gospel is happening in the words of Luke in the book of Acts.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, August 14, 2013 Read – Acts 22:17-29 Luke provides corroborating evidence indirectly from two sources. The Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem know full well that Paul had once been a persecutor of Christians in many of the synagogues in Jerusalem and elsewhere. They only need to look to their own experience about that. And they also know full well that Paul had approved of the death of Stephen. Luke skillfully places this corroborating evidence inside another appeal to his own experience. Luke provides his readers with information that he has not mentioned before – information that stands somewhat in opposition to what Luke has earlier reported. Luke reports that when Paul had returned to Jerusalem he was in the Temple praying – something a faithful Jew would be doing. In the midst of this time of prayer, Paul falls into a trance through which he receives a warning directly from Jesus to flee from Jerusalem because he will not be accepted there. Paul thinks that they will surely believe him because he had been such a persecutor. Jesus is not convinced and tells Paul that he is being sent away not just to rescue him from danger, but because Jesus has a greater purpose for Paul – to send him to the Gentiles. Luke’s way of providing corroborating evidence indirectly is cleverly done! If we remember what Luke has told us earlier we ought to be at least a little puzzled. Following the telling of the Damascus Road encounter in chapter 9, Luke tells us that Paul returned to Jerusalem and attempted to join the Apostles, but was prevented from doing so because they did not trust him. Eventually Barnabas brings Paul to the Apostles and he is welcomed and “went in an out among them in Jerusalem” (Acts 9:28). Eventually they recognize that Paul is in danger and send him off to Tarsus. There is no mention in the first story about a trance, or that it is Jesus who warns Paul of the danger, or that Jesus commissions Paul to go to the Gentiles. What is going on? Of course the two versions are not completely incompatible with one another, but it becomes difficult to meld them together. Even if they each contain parts of the truth, why does Luke tell the story as he does? One possible explanation is that Luke has at his disposal two versions of what happened. He uses the first version in the first story because it matches his intentions better – Paul is authenticated by the Jerusalem authorities. He uses the second version – a version that matches much closer with Paul’s own telling of this story in Galatians (Galatians 1:18-24) – because the need to emphasize the Apostles’ role is no longer necessary and getting to Paul’s ministry among the Gentiles is. Luke is not troubled by the discrepancy in his story – mostly because he was not concerned about providing historical accuracy knowing full well that historical accuracy is not the guarantee of truth. At this point Paul’s speech is cut short – it will be picked up again later. When Paul says that Jesus has sent him to the Gentiles, the crowd erupts once again, and the tribune must rescue Paul a second time. The tribune is intent on getting to the bottom of all this commotion and uses the tried and true Roman method of torture. A good flogging will get the truth out of Paul. Again, Luke provides us with a bit more information about Paul that saves the day – and saves Paul from a flogging. Paul tells the centurion in charge of flogging him that he is a Roman citizen and reminds him that it is not legal to flog a Roman citizen who is not condemned. Luke knows Roman law well. The tribune would be in great trouble if he were to carry through with the flogging – in fact he is already in very serious trouble because he had bound Paul in chains, since it was against Roman law to place chains on a Roman citizen who is not condemned. Luke likely could have provided all this information about Paul at one time. He has skillfully added suspense and interest to the story by providing the information little by little and over the course of events. What will now happen to the tribune? And what will happen to Paul? Luke uses the opportunity to demonstrate the graciousness of Paul. He will not bring trouble on the tribune – though Luke does emphasize that the whole experience has made the tribune afraid. The exchange between these two Roman citizens, one who had purchased his citizenship at a high price and the other who was born a citizen, is also a delightful touch that Luke adds to the story. One can only imagine what it must have been like to be the tribune in this story. He likely went home with a mind full of wonder – and likely did not sleep all night. As we will soon hear he makes up his mind in the morning to get to the bottom of this strange encounter.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, August 13, 2013 Read – Acts 22:6-16 Having established Paul’s impeccable credentials and demonstrated how Paul sought to identify with his hearers, Luke moves on to the second main element of Paul’s defense speech, a presentation of the basic issue. Paul begins by appealing to his own experience. He tells the story of his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus Road. We have heard this report before (Acts 9:1-19), and we will hear it one more time (Acts 26:12-18). Repeating it three times is Luke’s way of adding emphasis to this experience. He wants us to remember the event and know that it is crucial to his story. The three accounts are essentially the same, though there are some minor differences. In the first account Paul’s companions hear a voice but see nothing. Here they see the light but hear nothing. In the first account, Ananias has a much larger role in the story than here, and he will completely disappear in the third telling of the Damascus Road encounter. These minor differences can easily be explained as we think about Luke’s purpose in each telling of the story. In the first story it is important to Luke that he distinguishes between the resurrection appearance of Jesus to the Apostles and elders of Jerusalem and the appearance of Jesus to Paul on the Damascus Road. The Apostles and elders saw Jesus physically in the 40 days between the resurrection and ascension – that experience was, for Luke, not repeatable. His point in the first telling of the story is that nobody, including Paul, saw anyone. By now Luke has made his point about the authenticating role of the Apostles and he does not need to worry about that. In this second telling of the story, the emphasis is more on hearing than seeing. Paul asks, “What am I to do, Lord?” and receives a longer answer in terms of what will happen in Damascus when Paul encounters Ananias. Consequently, Luke places emphasis on only Paul hearing – those who are with him do not hear. In the third telling of the story, Luke does not mention whether Paul’s companions either hear or see. And Ananias disappears completely. Paul receives his commission directly from Jesus and not through Ananias, which matches much closer with Paul’s own claim in his letter to the Galatians (Galatians 1:1, 11-12). It is interesting that Paul never mentions his Damascus Road encounter in any of his letters. Perhaps Paul’s reason for doing that was to turn attention away from himself and toward Jesus. It is one thing for someone else to talk about your experience than it is for you to do so. It is also interesting that Luke is comfortable about simply dropping Ananias out of the story by the third telling and matching the story more closely with Paul’s own story. Once again the answer is likely found in Luke’s use of the story and his disregard for historical accuracy. Luke is a good storyteller who makes the most out of his material. Paul’s appeal to his own experience is not enough to make the case. While Paul’s experience is important, it is not Paul’s experience that is the main issue. Luke will move on now provide corroborating evidence – the third element of a good defense speech.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, August 12, 2013 Read – Acts 21:37-22:5 As Paul is rescued by the Roman tribune, we learn that the tribune had mistakenly identified Paul with an Egyptian insurrectionist who had caused quite a stir in Jerusalem. The tribune discovers the case of mistaken identity when Paul speaks to him in the finest Greek. The implication is that the Egyptian would not have used Greek, although that would not necessarily have been the case – Greek was spoken in Egypt too. The tribune is surprised by Paul’s articulate language. Incidentally, Josephus tells a story of an Egyptian insurrectionist who arose at about this same time claiming that he was the Messiah, the deliverer of the people from the Romans. I have at times been critical of Luke’s historical accuracy, but in general Luke’s story does reflect historical accuracy, and that is surely the case here. My point is that sometimes Luke has subjected historical accuracy to theological necessity, which is not necessarily a bad thing – it just means that we need to receive what Luke says with this in mind. As I have said many times before, the writers of the Bible are not nearly as concerned about historical accuracy as we moderns are, which is probably more our problem than theirs, since we have placed so much emphasis on the Bible being always historically true. Our notion of inerrancy would likely have not been understandable to Biblical writers. Perhaps we can learn something from them. Perhaps the best way to think about all of this is that Biblical authors simply did not have all the historical details about what really happened. They have the broad sense of what occurred and a number of pieces of information that have been passed on over the course of time. They have fit all this together and created the “storyline” as a narrative to proclaim the gospel. Mark was likely the first to do this. Luke has followed in Mark’s path and expanded the story to include the first years of the church. Neither Mark nor Luke, or for that matter any other gospel writer, knew exactly what happened and when it happened. Their story and their creative genius have provided us with a proclamation of Jesus as the suffering Messiah whom God raised from the dead and through whom God offers forgiveness of sins and new life. We have noticed this core message in the speeches of Acts – that is the core of the gospel and the proclamation that ultimately matters. Historical details add understandability to the story and make it more interesting, even if they are not strictly accurate historically. Once the tribune learns that Paul is not the Egyptian insurrectionist, he also learns that Paul is a Jew from Tarsus in Cilicia and a citizen of that important city. Exactly what Paul means when he says he is a citizen is not fully clear – it will become clear shortly – but Paul’s identity makes an impression of the tribune. He is not sure what he has on his hands now. Paul begs to speak to the people – people who have just raged against him and threatened him with death by mob violence. The tribune grants Paul permission to speak. Exactly how the crowd was quieted down enough to hear is a puzzle. Once again it may be important to remember that Luke is likely not reporting a “verbatim” speech telling us exactly what Paul said – Luke is creating a speech that was appropriate for Paul to proclaim to the Jews of Jerusalem. The speech is as much for the benefit of Luke’s readers as it is for the crowd. Luke tells us that the crowd does reach a point of silence as Paul begins to speak to them in Hebrew – actually the language used would have been Aramaic since that was the language spoken in Jerusalem at the time. Those who have studied “defense speeches” of that time have recognized that Paul’s speech follows the standard model. The standard defense speech contains three basic elements: (1) an opening statement providing the defenders good credentials and designed to identify with those who hear, (2) a presentation of the basic issue of contention, and (3) a provision of corroborating evidence to justify the defenders position. All three of these elements are present in Paul’s speech to the Jerusalem Jews. We will look at the first element of the speech today and pick up the remaining elements in the coming days. Paul begins by addressing his hearers as “brothers and fathers” which is a very respectable way to begin. Paul is one of them and lends the proper respect to those who are older than he is. Paul is attempting to identify with his hearers. He then goes on to provide his credentials. It is important that we hear Paul when he says “I am a Jew.” Paul does not say, “I was a Jew.” As far as Paul is concerned he is still a Jew – always was one and always will be one. This is exactly the claim that Paul makes in his letter to the Philippians. There he says, “If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh. I have more; circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee, as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless” (Philippians 3:4-6). Of course Paul will go on to say in Philippians that all of those credentials, which remain true of Paul, are worthless – garbage to be thrown away because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus and being made his own. In Philippians it is not that Paul is saying that his credentials as a Jew are not true, just that they do not matter. Luke and Paul agree with one another fully about Paul’s credentials. Luke reports much of the same things as Paul does, with a few variations, none of which are in conflict with one another. Luke tells us again that Paul is from Tarsus in Cilicia – something Paul never reveals in his letter but that does not matter. Luke also tells us that Paul was educated in Jerusalem “at the feet of Gamaliel” – the same Gamaliel who rescued Peter and John from the Sanhedrin when they were about to put them to death (Acts 5:34-39). As we mentioned then, this Gamaliel was the grandson of the great Hebrew rabbi Hillel. Luke does not tell us at this point that Paul was brought up to be a Pharisee, though he will soon corroborate Paul’s own claim that he is indeed a Pharisee (Acts 23:6; Philippians 3:5). Luke describes Paul as zealous for the law, which is exactly what Paul said in Philippians. Both Luke and Paul tell of Paul’s persecution of the church. While Paul does not mention that he had letters of support from the high priests in his pursuit of believers in Damascus, Paul does confirm that it was in Damascus that he was rescued by being let down through the wall in a basket (2 Corinthians 11:33). Luke and Paul are very much in agreement about Paul’s credentials. And those credentials are impeccable! Paul’s defense speech has met the first criteria – provide good credentials and identify with the hearers. Will Paul’s speech have a good effect? We will need to wait and see.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, August 11, 2013 Read – Acts 21:17-36 In language that is typical of Luke, when Paul arrives in Jerusalem, the first thing he does is to appear before James, the brother of Jesus, and the other elders who are in Jerusalem. They must authenticate what Paul has been doing. So Paul reports all that has happened and he receives their approval. Peter is notably absent from the story. This is a curiosity without any explanation since Luke provides us with absolutely no information, and as we have noted, Luke does not mention Peter again in the book of Acts after the Jerusalem conference (Acts 15). As we noted earlier, the picture that Luke is painting of a submissive Paul “reporting in” does not square well with what we can read in many of Paul’s letters. Luke’s story is not without significant historical challenges. Would Paul have acted in this submissive way? Why doesn’t Luke mention a word about the offering Paul was bringing for the poor of Jerusalem – the main motivation in Paul’s letters for his journey to Jerusalem at this time (Romans 15:25-29)? Paul has mentioned that Titus was among those representatives from Macedonia who were accompanying Paul to guarantee that the offering would be delivered in good order (2 Corinthians 8:19). Why does Luke omit talking about Titus? This is the second time Luke has done that, since Paul also says that Titus accompanied him to the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15. From what we read in Paul’s letters, it is doubtful that Paul would have agreed with the way in which Luke has portrayed this scene. The challenges only become greater as we move forward. Having heard Paul’s report and given Paul’s ministry their blessing, the authenticating leadership in Jerusalem moves on to what for them is a huge problem. First of all, they tell Paul that there are “many thousands of believers (in Jerusalem) among the Jews and they are all zealous for the law” (Acts 21:20). Once again, Luke does not want his readers to miss the point that a great many Jews did receive Jesus as the Messiah. He began with about 120 on the day of Pentecost and told about 3000 more believers added that day (Acts 2:41). In a short time there were at least 5000 Jewish believers (Acts 4:4). While no longer providing a number, Luke repeats several times that the number of believers is growing! Here the number is beyond counting – thousands of zealous Jewish believers! Luke’s contention that his readers, including us, need to recognize that the Jews did not reject the Messiah but welcomed him is an important message in his gospel and in the book of Acts. We would do well to remember that. But, the presence of “thousands of Jews, zealous for the law” does create a problem. It’s the mention that they are “zealous for the law” that becomes the bone of contention. What does it mean to say that they were “zealous for the law?” It likely means that these Jewish Christians are behaving in much the same way that other Jewish non-believers in Jesus were behaving. Likely an outside observer would not distinguish much difference – although in conversation they would discover that what did distinguish the Jewish Christians from the Jewish non-Christians was that Jewish Christians understood Jesus to be the Messiah. We have noticed all along that Luke has been portraying Christianity, not as a new religion, but as the proper expression of Judaism. In Luke’s mind there likely is no such thing as Christianity. All Christians are really Jews who believe in Jesus as the Messiah, and that includes Gentiles who have been grafted into Judaism. The struggle that Luke is describing is fully within the scope of Judaism! What Luke describes for his readers is a community of “thousands of Jews, zealous for the law” who believe in Jesus and yet live in a very “Jewish” way. They observe the Torah by circumcising their children, following the “food laws” and all the other “purity laws” laid down in the OT, and participating in the sacrificial system and festivals which would still have been taking place. For all intents and purposes they remain faithful Jews. The contention between “believing Jews” and “non-believing Jews” was only with respect to Jesus – was he the Messiah or not? This glimpse into the early life of the church, at least in Jerusalem, is very valuable. We do not often think of the early church behaving in this way. That Luke has told us this story is evidence that they did. We need to remember that this is now at least 20 to 25 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus. That Jewish Christians and Jewish non-Christians would have looked so much alike and shared so much in common in the experience of the Jerusalem community and perhaps throughout most of Judea is incredible! Luke’s insight provides us a great deal to ponder. The reality “on the ground” in Jerusalem and in the communities of Paul in Asia Minor and Greece was likely very different. In the “outer reaches” of the Kingdom of God, Jewish practices likely ebbed away rather quickly. The experience of Christians in Corinth, Ephesus, or even Rome likely had very few of the Jewish customs that were important in Jerusalem. One has a hard time imagining these Christians worrying very much about being “Jewish” in their practice – although we should not overstate the case. It is also significant that Luke tells us that Paul always went first to the Jewish synagogues. Paul’s own letters do demonstrate Paul’s concern for the Jewish people, but they also paint quite a different picture from what we are reading in Luke’s portrait in the book of Acts. James, the brother of Jesus, and the other leaders in Jerusalem are very worried about how Paul will be perceived by the Christians in Jerusalem – and by other non-Christian Jews there. They are so worried that they nearly dismiss Paul’s report. Luke’s omission of any mention of the offering Paul was delivering likely means that either they did not receive it, or if they did, it was unimportant to them. What was important was presenting Paul in an acceptable way. Rumor has it that Paul has been teaching “Jews living among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, and telling them not to circumcise their children or observe the customs” (Acts 21:21). The evidence from Paul’s letters comes very close to substantiating that the rumor was true. It may be going too far to say that Paul was teaching the Jews to forsake their Jewishness, but he certainly was advocating that Gentiles did not need to follow Jewish custom – and Jews, like Paul, who chose to do so, no longer needed to be bound by those customs either. “What then is to be done?” (Acts 21:22) These sound like desperate words of frightened and anxious people. A plan is put together for Paul to demonstrate his Jewishness. Once again the authorities in Jerusalem tell Paul what he is to do – likely the Paul we meet in his letters would not have accepted their directive so submissively, but this is Luke’s story not Paul’s. Paul is told to submit to the rights of purification, which would have meant he had to go to a priest and present himself as one who is presently impure and thus unfit to participate in the worship of God. Clearly Paul would not have perceived himself as either impure or unfit to participate in worship. To submit to such a right of purification would have been only for the sake of others and not because this is something Paul thought God required him to do. The right of purification would take seven days. Added to this was a plan for Paul to pay for shaving of the heads of four men from Jerusalem who apparently were ending a period under which they had been observing a Nazarite vow. What was Paul to use for paying for this vow – perhaps some of the money he was bringing in his offering. Can we imagine Paul actually doing that? Hardly, since Paul was so concerned about the integrity of the offering he was bringing to Jerusalem (2 Corinthians 8:20-21). To do such a thing would be diverting money collected for one purpose to a completely different purpose. Was Paul independently wealthy? Again such could hardly have been the case. Did the Jerusalem authorities supply the money? Such questions must remain unanswered. The historical challenges between Paul’s letters and the story Luke is telling in the book of Acts continue to mount. We have been listening to Luke tell his story for a long time now. We may have been wondering just who this author is and what he was like – what were his core beliefs? Of course we can only speculate about that, but it appears from all that we have read thus far in the book of Acts that the author of Acts was himself likely a “Jew, zealous for the law”; or, at the very least that he was sympathetic to those who held that point of view. Such a person could hardly have been a co-worker and associate of Paul. Listening carefully to what the Bible says in this regard leads us to a different conclusion than tradition has handed down to us – that the author of Acts was Luke, the physician and companion of Paul. That the author of the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts was the same person is without question. But he almost assuredly was not the Luke we meet in the book of Acts and in the letters of Paul. His identity slips into the unknown as does his name which is recorded nowhere in either the gospel we call Luke or in the book of Acts. While we can appreciate his brilliance and skill and the fact that God used him to proclaim the gospel, he will forever remain nameless. As we return to the story that Luke is telling us, Paul receives the assurance from the authorities in Jerusalem that if he will just do this act, he will demonstrate to the Jerusalem community that there is “nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself observe and guard the law” (Acts 21:24). If Paul does as he is told, he will be viewed as a “Jew, zealous for the law” and all will be well. They go on to talk about how the Gentiles are to be presented to this observant Jewish community. The four injunctions included in the decision of the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15 are repeated – significantly, there is no mention of circumcision here or that the Jerusalem conference had agreed to set circumcision aside. These four injunctions were precisely about behavior expected of even the Gentiles that they would have observed to enable Jews to remain “ritually pure” in their presence. Even such Gentiles would be acceptable to “Jews, zealous for the law” since they were yielding to these Jewish demands. Luke tells us that Paul unreservedly agrees with the decision and “does what they tell him to do” (Acts 21:23). Could the Paul we meet in his letters have agreed to such a thing? Perhaps – though not as easily as Luke implies. In his first letter to the Corinthians Paul writes, “For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) so that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law) so that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people that I might by all means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings” (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). It is not impossible that Paul went along with what was asked of him by the Jerusalem authorities in hopes that by doing so the gospel might be furthered. On the other hand, do we do things we really don’t believe in just to keep the peace? Certainly if Paul did go along with what was asked of him, he would not have done it without a struggle and likely without making it very clear that he was doing so because he chose to do so and not because he had to do so. It is likely that we need to take the story as Luke tells it with a “grain of salt” – it is Luke’s story and not Paul’s and Paul most likely would have told the story very differently. We do not have Paul’s account of this visit to Jerusalem so we are not able to compare it with Luke’s as we did regarding the Jerusalem conference (Acts 15). The only story we have is Luke’s and we need to follow it forward. The plan put forth by the authorities in Jerusalem goes badly! The plan does not work and Paul is quickly put in great danger. One can only wonder about the impact this had on the Jewish Christian community in Jerusalem. It is noteworthy that they did not come to Paul’s defense. There is no mention of anyone standing up for Paul – only his sister and nephew provide any help. We will not hear again about the Jerusalem Christian community in the book of Acts. They disappear just as Peter did earlier. It is difficult not to ask why they apparently abandoned Paul. Of course we are not told directly that they did such a thing – but the absence of the Jerusalem authorities from the story is remarkable and perhaps speaks louder than words. We are left disappointed by them. Luke tells us it was Jews from Asia that raised the ruckus that led to Paul’s arrest. Their charges against Paul are that Paul is guilty of teaching against Judaism and against Jerusalem and the Temple – and most seriously that Paul has desecrated the Temple by bring a Gentile into the Temple’s inner courts. The Temple in Jerusalem was arranged as a series of concentric circles. At the outmost court of the Temple was the court of the Gentiles – anyone could enter there. Between this court of the Gentiles and the next inner circle, the court of the women, was a barrier upon which was written the proclamation – “No Gentile may enter here and those who do so will be responsible for their own impending death” – inscriptions with words to this effect have been found on the stone relics of the Jerusalem Temple. For Paul to have brought a Gentile beyond this barrier was a capital crime that demanded Paul’s death. It was also against Roman law to desecrate a religious temple and the punishment for violators was death. The charge against Paul was deadly. Of course readers of the book of Acts know that none of the charges against Paul are true. And Paul’s own letters would concur. It does not matter to the mob that emerges in Jerusalem. As Luke tells the story the scene is one of chaos with some saying one thing and some another. The story is reminiscent of the story of the stoning of Stephen – and the arrest of Jesus long ago. We have been noticing how Luke has written his story in such a way that the journey of Paul to Jerusalem and his arrest there are patterned after what happened to Jesus. The story of Stephen’s arrest and death also echoed the story of the arrest and death of Jesus. Luke is not without purpose in telling these stories in this way. Followers of Jesus can expect to be treated as their master was treated. While there are differences within these three stories we ought not to miss the similarities. Perhaps surprisingly it is the Romans that come to Paul’s rescue. Once again it is worth noting the absence of any Jerusalem Christians – but perhaps this is one more similarity in the story. Jesus was abandoned too. We remember that in Mark’s story not one person is left at the foot of the cross when Jesus dies – at least for Luke there were some faithful women there. In words that echo the scene of Jesus’ conviction the crowd cries out “Away with him” (Luke 23:18, Acts 21:36)! What is to become of Paul? We will hear more of the story tomorrow.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, August 10, 2013 Read – Acts 21:1-16 The journey to Jerusalem continues. The itinerary is quite detailed and gives the impression of one who was on the journey – we need to remember that we are still in a “we” section of Luke’s story. As I have mentioned earlier, perhaps the author of Acts really was along on this part of the journey – not as a co-worker of Paul, but as an observer. We have met him on the sea voyages but we will soon learn that he will now travel up to Jerusalem with Paul and the others. There, once again, he will disappear from sight until a few years later when he will reappear for Paul’s last voyage on a ship on that fateful journey to Rome when the ship will be caught up in a storm and wrecked on an island south of Rome. It is tempting to speculate about the use of “we” in this part of the story. We cannot speak with certainly, but the theory I have suggested does seem to have some credibility. Aside from these interesting details about the journey, Luke does not fail to carry through his main theme of telling about the “farewell tour” of Paul. And once again the story is written in parallel with the journey of Jesus Luke told earlier in his gospel. Just as Jesus knows he will journey to Jerusalem and be handed over to the Gentile, so also Paul is warned of the same fate awaiting him. Following Mark, Luke used “passion predictions” to highlight the journey of Jesus. The words spoken by Agabus function almost like a “passion prediction” in Luke’s story in Acts. Luke tells us something rather strange when he tells us that it was “by the Holy Spirit” that the friends of Paul warned him not to go to Jerusalem and of the fate that was certain to engulf him there. Was Paul not listening to the Spirit? Luke had told us earlier of that same Spirit telling Paul in a dream that he must go to Jerusalem and eventually to Rome. Does the Spirit speak mixed messages? There is a very human character to this story. Paul’s friends did not want him to go to Jerusalem and to suffer there. Could it be that they thought it was the Spirit speaking to them when it was only their human emotion of love and caring that was telling them to warn Paul not to go? Perhaps this business of hearing the message of the Spirit was as difficult and confusing for them as it is for us. How does God speak to us? How do we know it is really God? How do we know what God is saying? All of those are hard questions with no definitive answers! Listening to the Spirit is not so easy – it’s not easy now and it never was. Once Paul’s decision was made, Luke tells us some important words regarding the conclusion his friends came to – they conclude by praying, “God’s will be done!” Maybe that’s the best any of us can do. We try to hear and try to discern and then we leave it in God’s hands. Once again, the response, “God’s will be done,” echoes the words of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane when he was agonizing over the destiny God had in store for him – “Not my will but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). We have noticed earlier that Luke told the story of the death of Stephen in such a way that Stephen’s death echoed the death of Jesus – they are written as parallel accounts. Now we have seen how Luke is doing the same thing with respect to Paul. The telling of these three stories in parallel accounts is not an accident but a deliberate action by Luke. The brilliance of Luke as an author is revealed in his careful crafting of his story. And, once again, the story itself bears witness to the human hand of the author in the telling of the story. The inspiration of scripture does not mean that the human author has no part in the decision that is made as if they were some kind of “blind and thoughtless scribe” simply writing what the Spirit says. We do the Bible a disservice when we fail to appreciate the humanity involved and the skill and responsibility of the authors. We value the Bible when we let it speak for itself and let its authors be responsible for their creative work – and in the process we come to understand the Word of God in a far more complex and powerful way.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, August 9, 2013 Read – 2 Corinthians 9:6-15 If Paul may have slipped a bit in yesterday’s writing he is fully back on track in today’s reading. God loves a cheerful giver! No more important stewardship words have ever been written. Stewardship is a matter of grateful response to God’s abundant goodness. Certainly Paul knew that better than most. He is a great teacher for us. One might wonder why it was so important to Paul to bring this offering to the church at Jerusalem. First of all he was fulfilling what he understood to be the request made of him at the Jerusalem conference where the church made the bold decision that circumcision was not required of Gentiles for them to become Christians. As Paul says in Galatians, all they asked of him was to “remember the poor” (Galatians 2:10) – and Paul did not forget. But there is something even deeper working for Paul – generous stewardship brings thanksgiving and glory to God! Paul wanted the Corinthians to be good stewards so that God might be glorified in their lives and in the process they might come to know the deep joy of giving. Paul wants that for all of us too.

Weekly Announcements Aug 11 2013

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, August 8, 2013 Read – 2 Corinthians 9:1-5 In our reading for today Paul uses rather persuasive language to encourage the Corinthians to follow through on their intentions. Just in case they are thinking of backing out, Paul reminds them that he has been boasting about them to the Macedonians – and, by the way, Paul will be bringing some of those Macedonians with him. Should the people of Corinth not carry through, Paul tells them that he will be embarrassed – and so will they. This is not the best motivation for Paul to appeal to. In fact personally I wish he had not written as he did. Guilt is a motivator, but it is not the best motivator and does not last long. Paul is not at his best here. But, the offering was apparently deeply important to Paul – we see that in his strong appeal. Once again, readers of Paul and Acts are led to wonder why something that was so important for Paul in his letters is almost absent in the book of Acts – Luke only mentions it in passing a time or two. All of this is really not all that important, but it does lead readers of Paul and Luke to conclude that each was driven by their own intentions. The writings of every Biblical writer are shaped by that writer’s intention. Understanding that is both helpful and exciting – it leads us to dig deeper to understand each writer and helps us to recognize the deeply human nature of the scripture.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, August 7, 2013 Read – 2 Corinthians 8:16-24 In our reading for today Paul provides us with a bit of information that is important as we consider Luke’s story in the book of Acts. Paul tells us that Titus had been appointed to accompany Paul as he delivers the offering to the church in Jerusalem. Readers of Acts have been puzzled that Luke does not mention Titus in this final journey of Paul to Jerusalem. Was that because Titus was a Gentile and would have had the potential to place Paul in a more negative light than Luke wants to portray? This is not the first time Luke has omitted Titus from the story. We may remember that in the book of Galatians when Paul is giving his account of the Jerusalem conference, an event that Luke also tells about in chapter 15, Paul tells us that Titus accompanied him then as well and that the leaders in Jerusalem did not require Titus to be circumcised. We can only wonder what is going on for Luke in the way he has told these stories. Was he unaware of Titus? Does he use a different name for Titus, perhaps Trophimus? Both of these speculations are doubtful. We are left to ponder Luke’s motive in dropping Titus from his story. As we turn back to Paul’s letter to the Corinthians it is important to note why Paul thought it was important that representatives of the churches accompany him to Jerusalem – it was to insure that everything was “above board” – “for we intend to do what is right not only in the Lord’s sight but in the sight of others” (2 Corinthians 8:21). All Christian behavior, especially regarding the use of money, needs to be at the highest ethical standard. We do well to heed Paul’s words.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, August 6, 2013 Read – 2 Corinthians 8:8-15 In our reading for today, Paul points to Jesus as the example for all of us to follow in the use of our wealth. As Jesus was generous in his giving so were the Corinthian Christians to be generous in their giving. It is apparent that the Corinthians have expressed their intention to participate in the collection that Paul is making for the church in Jerusalem – what is needed now is for them to follow through on those intentions. Paul goes on to say something really important for all who follow Jesus to hear – God only expects us to participate in accordance with our own means. Too often Christians compare themselves with others and either justify themselves, or perhaps condemn themselves as unworthy because they are not as able as someone else. God has made each of us to be his own and looks only upon what God has given us. In fact, Paul points back to the OT story of the people of God in the wilderness collecting manna – those who collected much did not have too much and those who collected a little had enough (Exodus 16:18). God is the giver of all and God is not stingy in his giving.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, August 5, 2013 Read – 2 Corinthians 8:1-7 We are going to step away from Luke’s story in Acts one more time this week and listen to some more of Paul’s words – this time words written to the people of Corinth. We have often noticed that Paul’s letters tell a story significantly different from the story told by Luke in Acts. That will not be the case in our reading from 2 Corinthians – other than the fact that the content of Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians in chapters 8 and 9 speaks of the great importance that Paul placed upon the offering he was gathering to bring to the church in Jerusalem. According to Paul’s letters the delivery of this offering was Paul’s main reason for going to Jerusalem. Luke scarcely mentions this offering, and certainly does not see the delivery of the offering as the motive for Paul’s journey. Having said that, we can benefit from hearing more of Paul’s own words to leaders in the church, especially in light of Luke’s concern that leaders not become possessed by possessions, but rather to live out the word of Jesus, “It is better to give than it is to receive.” Let’s turn now to Paul’s words to the Corinthians. We have heard of Paul’s ministry in Macedonia – this is where the cities of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea are to be found. From Paul’s letters we know that these were churches that were close to Paul and close to his heart. In his appeal to the Corinthian church Paul uses them as an example. The most powerful words he writes about the Macedonians are these – “first they gave themselves to the Lord” – generous stewardship flows out of commitment of one’s whole life to God. The Macedonians understood that. Paul was surprised at their generosity since they were experiencing great affliction and extreme poverty. We have heard often of Luke’s concern about the perils of wealth. Paul shares that concern with Luke. And so did Jesus before both of them. As the Macedonians became an example for the Corinthians, may they become an example for all of us.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, August 4, 2013 Read – Acts 20:17-38 We have noticed that Luke is now describing Paul’s “farewell tour” of the churches he has established and ministered to. It is fitting, therefore, that Luke should provide us with a “sample” of Paul’s farewell speeches among these churches. We have been noticing the speeches in the book of Acts. Rather than see them as “verbatim” accounts of what Paul, or anyone else for that matter, said at a particular time, it is better to understand them as Luke’s compilation of what was likely said in many different venues and in many different ways. Luke gives us examples of what his character might have said. That is likely true from a practical point of view as well, since no one was recording any one speech – we simply don’t know exactly what Paul, or anyone else, actually said on any one occasion. As we think back over the story that Luke has told us so far, we notice that there have been three major speeches of Paul recorded by Luke – once again we should not think of these as “verbatim” speeches but examples. When Paul’s missionary venture had begun and Luke tells of his first encounter in the Jewish synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia, Paul is asked to speak. Luke tells us the only lengthy speech of Paul to a Jewish audience in a Jewish synagogue (Acts 13:16-47). When Paul encounters the Gentile world of Athens, Luke records another speech (Acts 17:22-31). Now, Paul is not proclaiming to either Jews or Gentiles in need of hearing the word of God and becoming believers in Jesus, he is proclaiming to those who are already followers – this is Luke’s version of a typical speech of Paul to the church. Paul’s farewell speech has connections with the farewell speeches of others in the Bible, including Jesus. The parallels between the farewell speech of Jesus to his disciples in Luke 22:14-38 are striking. As Jesus before him, Paul sums up his ministry, warns his followers of difficulties to come, and tells of his departure from them – “they will see his face no more” (Acts 20:38). In his speech Paul exhorts all leaders in the church and in fact every follower of Jesus to let their life be an example for others to follow. One is reminded of the maxim – “Actions speak louder than words!” It is interesting that Paul seems as concerned about the perils of wealth and its effects upon leaders and church members as he does about false teaching. In his speech Paul proclaims a word of Jesus that is found nowhere else in the Bible – “It is better to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). Jesus had also warned against the “cares of this world” and their ability to choke off faith. We have noticed earlier that Luke is now paralleling the journey of Paul to Jerusalem with that made by Jesus in the gospel story. Both are on a journey to Jerusalem that will lead to hardship – Jesus to the cross and Paul to arrest and, if tradition is correct, eventually to his own martyrdom in Rome. Luke is indeed a careful and skillful writer. As his readers we should not miss his masterful genius.