Friday, October 08, 2010

Friday Photo


Yes, another Yosemite pic! Valley floor, winter, at sunset. Click on the photo to make it larger(Will open another window)

I had never been to Yosemite in winter prior to this trip here, so I was excited. I had to go by myself, but I was OK with that.
Night before I am going to leave, big storm blows into SoCal. Closes the Grapevine and Tehachpi passes. But I, I have reservations in Yosemite that night! I'm not gonna let some snowstorm get in my way!
Looked at the map and figured that I could work my way around if I got off the main highways. Let's just say that was a mistake and that I got stuck in snow on a lonely stretch of road. Some locals got me unstuck and I think I paid them 20 bucks, but it was worth it.
I decided that waiting until Tehachipi was the best bet.

Got to the Valley at 5PM, after leaving mt house at 5AM. A trip that usually takes half that time.
Next morning got up and shot all day long!
This shot was probably from the first day, from my fav spot at sunset. The way the light hits El Capitan at sunset is just magical.
And then it got cold. Real cold. Like seeing the heat come out from my finger-tips through my gloves cold.

Thursday, October 07, 2010

Redemptive-Historical Method


The blog series “Redemptive-Historical Method” is an outgrowth of the “Preaching Christ in a Postmodern World”, by Tim Keller and Edmund Clowney, available on iTunes. These are the notes from the course.
HOW? A CHRISTO-CENTRIC FOCUS

INTRODUCTION


For theological, pastoral, and missiological reasons we should read the Bible as 'Redemption History' and not simply as a body of spiritual and moral information. This means that every part and text of the Bible is part of the 'Big Story' of salvation and attests to God's saving purposes which climax in Jesus Christ. Therefore, every text is 'really about Jesus'. But how do we 'get to Christ', practically speaking, when preaching a text that is not directly about Jesus? How can we actually read each text 'Christologically', with a Christo-centric focus?

The preacher feels this most acutely when preaching from the 3/4 of the Bible called the 'Old Testament'. When most people think of "Preaching Christ" from such a text, they think of doing so by typology. They look in the text for a 'type' of Christ within it. So, for example, we might preach Isaac as a type of the sacrificed son, or David as the type of the warrior-savior, and so on. This practice (as we have seen) is still somewhat controversial, but even if it were granted it would not suffice. Most texts of the Bible do not provide a classic 'type' of Jesus. The vast majority of psalms are not clear and consensus 'Messianic' psalms, for example. So in order to 'get to Christ' preachers may very lamely and artificially tack him on to the end of the sermon (e.g. 'You shouldn't lie, but if you do, through Jesus you can be forgiven.") Or they force him in through finding superficial similarities, which really boil down to allegorizing.

But it is important to see how many different ways there are to 'preach Christ' besides direct typology. Sidney Greidanus lays out a number of 'ways' to preach Christ besides typology in his book “Preaching Christ from the Old Testament”. Goldsworthy too writes:

'The essence of typology is the recognition that within Scripture itself certain events, people, and institutions in biblical history bear a particular relationship to later events, people, or institutions. The relationship is such that the earlier foreshadows the later, and the later fills out or completes the earlier ....[But] I want to suggest that behind –the technical uses [of the term 'typology'].. . there is a principle that is far-reaching in its application. We may refer to this as macro-typology because it indicates that we are not dealing mainly with scattered examples but with a broad pattern ... The typological correspondence is not simply between persons, events, and institution, but between whole epochs of revelation ...”

What does Goldsworthy mean? I believe he means something like the following. (Note: I acknowledge both Goldsworthy and Greidanus' works as the basis for my following summaries and categories:

PREACHING CHRIST - BY INTERPRETIVE: METHOD
One way to prepare to preach with a Christ-centered focus is to ways to identify gospel 'pieces' that only Christ can resolve (themes), receive (law), complete (stories), or fulfill (symbols). If I were you I would create my own collection of ways to preach Christ in these ways from:

E. Clowney The Unfolding Mystery (Presbyterian and Reformed)
S. DeGraaf Promise and Deliverance (Four Volumes-Presbyterian and Reformed)
Carson is editing a series of books on these intercanonical themes.
Alec Motyer's Look to the Rock chooses seven of these redemptive themes and shows how Christ is the fulfillment of each.
See the last section of each chapter in Longman and Dillard's An Introduction to the Old Testament (Zondervan. 1994)
See Christopher J.H.Wright. Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament (IVP, 1992)

Upcoming posts on this subject will include:
THEME -RESOLUTION. Only Jesus resolves redemptive themes.
LAW- RECEPTION. Only Jesus lets us truly receive the law's requirements.
STORY-COMPLETION. Only Jesus completes the great stories of the Bible.
SYMBOL – FULFILLMENT. If a feature has symbolic significance for the author (symbolizing God's saving activity in some way) then it may be seen as a type of Christ, even if the author does not evidently have Christ consciously in mind.

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Assorted Pics (That I don't think I've uploaded yet, but don't hold me to it...)

Click on the picture to make it larger..(will open another window)

Gladiolas from the garden. (Take a picture, it'll last longer.)


Scene from last winter.

Garden flowers


Flamingo from the zoo



Fall Tree

Elephants

Tuesday, October 05, 2010

Redemptive-Historical Method


Broader Implications of the Approach

by Tim Keller


Two Basic 'Theological Frameworks'.

Richard Lints, in The Fabric of Theology (Eerdmans, 1993) points out that what we have been calling 'Redemption-Historical' exegesis is more than just a way to interpret texts. He believes that one very significant difference among evangelicals lies between those who organize doctrines into a 'redemptive historical” framework and those who organize doctrines along the lines of a 'systematic-topical” framework. (See pp.259-290).

The first framework (which he connects with the names of Vos, Kline, and Gaffin) sees the basic theological structure of Scripture as a series of historical epochs in which God progressively reveals more and more of his redemptive purposes in Christ through successive covenants (Creation. Abrahamic. Mosaic. Christ-inaugurated. Christ-consummated).

The second framework (which he connects with the names of Hodge, Berkhof, and Erickson) sees the basic framework of Scripture as a series of logical categories or subject headings around which the varied texts of Scriptures are organized to produce doctrines (God, Man, Christ, Justification, Sanctification. Glorification).

What is the difference? The traditional teaching of the Reformed seminaries over the last 40 years has been basically correct--the RHM and STM are 'symbiotically related'. On the one hand, the systematics-student should study every Biblical text in its redemptive-historical context before doing topical-synthesis. Many conventional systematic-topics can be taken up and given new life through Biblical-theological treatment. For example, Harvie Conn did a Biblical-theological study of 'church growth', tracing the theme of 'multiplication' from the creation mandate through the whole Bible. On the other hand, if the RHM resists Systematic Theology too much we may not really have a unified Bible. We have to be able to answer the question: what is the authoritative Biblical teaching on this subject?


Having said that, the two approaches, practically speaking, tend to produce two somewhat different 'mindsets' when it comes to reading the Scripture. Lints argues that the redemptive-historical model (RHM) is better than the systematic-topical model (STM) for thinking about the Bible. John Murray speaks of the 'tendency to abstraction" of the STM. The tendency to dehistoricize and to arrive at 'timeless", topically oriented universals. ("Systematic Theology" in The New Testament Student and Theology, J.H.Skilton, ed. P&R 1976). RHM, on the other hand focuses on God's special revelation not primarily as 'naked information” but primarily as God's activity in history. But if this is true, then these different approaches will effect preaching and ministry in general.
Theological Frameworks Compared

a. The RHM gives us a dynamic view of our place in redemptive history. The RHM tells that we are now in a particular period of redemptive history (between the first and second coming of Christ). This is the period of the 'already-but-not-yet" of the kingdom of God, which sets us apart from the epoch previous to and following this one. The STM model has little concept of the all-pervasiveness of the kingdom of God. It tends to see the kingdom mainly in terms of one of the traditional 'millennial' positions.

The massive importance of the 'already-but-not-yet-kingdom' for both faith and practice is largely missed by those steeped in the STM approach. It tends to think of Biblical truth in a-historical categories of doctrine which we now have to 'apply" to our lives today. It tends to rely mainly on 'correctness" or technique ('5 principles for overcoming worryw). The RHM avoids over optimism or pessimism or legalism by focusing always on the dynamic kingdom-epoch lifestyle we live out now. The City of God and the City of Man are present realities. Christ has died, risen, and ascended has put us in a particular, current, dynamic relationship to God, our sin, our past, the Spirit, the world, and to the assembly of heaven itself. It tells us about this new relationship and status we have now, and how to live out as the people of God in this entire epoch. This is a far more “organic” way to think out Christianity.

John Stott, in a very interesting and easy-to-understand chapter called "The Now and the Not Yet" in The Contemporary Christian (IVP. 1992) shows what a powerful effect this theological category has on our practice. This understanding of our place in redemptive history keeps us from fundamentalism (the 'not yet Christians"), Pentecostalism (the 'already" Christians), and Liberalism (in some ways too 'not yet" and in other ways too 'already"). I t keeps us from over - or under-discipline. from over- or under-emphasis on evangelism or social concern, from over-optimism or under-optimism about revival, and so on. A-historical (STM) understandings of the Bible lead constantly to these extremes. By the way, Jonathan Edwards noted these same three enemies of true revival--Dead orthodoxy, Enthusiasm, and Heterodoxy.

b. The RHM gives us a more Biblical and less 'western" framework. Harvie Conn in Eternal Word and Changing Worlds (Zondervan. 1984) points out that the highly rational, scientific approach of STM is difficult for people of non-Western cultures to enjoy or grasp. Many are now pointing out that many of the formulators of STM were unwittingly shaped and affected by the Enlightenment, its detached rationality and its mistrust of history. Harvie (and Rick) note that the RHM gives much more weight to the fact that the Bible is filled with narrative. The gospel itself is a true story, not a set of "principles" or "laws". The STM approach has 'de-storied' the gospel. Harvie also points out that RHM understands that all God's truth is covenantal truth, never abstract from history and life. (See pp.225-234). Thus preaching and teaching from the RHM tends to be much less pietistic and abstract from life. All of this means that RHM is a vastly better vehicle for spreading the gospel through and to all people groups.

c. The RHM gives us a more corporate and less individualistic approach to ministry. The RHM understands that the goal of salvation history is not simply a 'right relationship' with God and live in heaven forever. The goal of redemption is really “re-creation”. God's saving purposes culminate in a new creation, not a disembodied eternal state. The gospel is not that we get to escape earth into heaven, but that heaven is "comes down" to transform the earth. The church then, is not simply an aggregation of people who help one another find God. but it is called to be in this world a sign of the coming new creation. We are to embody the 'new humanity that Christ is creating.

All of this drastically undermines the pietistic, individualistic, privatistic Christianity that can be the result of the STM approach. While the STM approach points us more to how we as individuals get peace with God and 'live right', the RHM framework calls us to live our lives out as a 'counter-culture', a new nation, in which our business practices, race relations, artistic expressions, family life, etc., show the world what humanity could be like under the Lordship of Christ. And the RHM emphasis on 'new creation' calls us to be concerned for the social and material world, since God's ultimate salvation will not only redeem the soul but the body and the physical world as well.

d. The RHM gives a much more relevant approach to 'post-modern' times. This point is closely connected to the previous one. "Post-modem" times are characterized by a rejection of the Enlightenment worship of rationality and technique, and is much more devoted to narrative and story as ways to find meaning. Also, post-modernity rejects the Enlightenment's emphasis on the individual and stresses the importance of community. As we have just seen, the RHM shows us all those resources in Biblical theology that the STM approach has tended to overlook. It breaks the Bible into stages of a Story--the story of Jesus and his salvation—while the STM breaks the Bible into logical categories. More than that, the RHM actually puts us into the story, showing us our place and stage in the unfolding of the kingdom of God. The RHM approach also shows concern for the regeneration of human community and even the physical environment, not just the individual, interior happiness. In all these ways, RHM is much more relevant to post-modern sensibilities.

e. The RHM gives us a more Christ-centered understanding of the Bible. The RHM sees the purpose of each epoch of redemptive history as being the progressive revealing of Christ. God could have poured our judgment on mankind in the Garden, therefore the only reason there is any history is because God has purposed to send his Son into the world, to pour out judgment on him and thereby bring salvation. Jesus is the only reason there is human history, and therefore he is goal of human history. Thus everything God says and does in history explain and prepare for the salvation of his Son. The STM, on the other hand, will examine the Law, the prophets, and history of Abraham, Moses, David, etc. for information about the various doctrinal topics--what we learn about how to live, what to believe. But the RHM sees every story and law and piece of wisdom literature as pointing to Christ and his work. Preaching and teaching from an STM framework tends to be much more moralistic and legalistic.

f. The RHM gives us a more organic way of reading Biblical texts. The RHM works at understanding the differences between stages in redemptive history, while the STM largely ignores such study. But many disputes over the application of the Old Testament laws are really based on a lack of understanding of the role which the Mosaic regulations played in that time in redemptive history (i.e. how they helped us look to and prepare for God's coming salvation) and of how that role is fulfilled in Christ.

Maybe even more fundamentally, the RHM really leads us to see the very purpose of each Biblical passage differently. We have said that RHM understands God's revelation never comes in the form of textbook type information. but in the form of covenant. Why? Because the purpose of God's truth is never to merely inform. but to know God in a relationship of love and service. For example, if we read Genesis 1-2 with an STM mind-set, expecting "naked information" about how the world was created, we will see it differently than those who read with a RHM mind-set, expecting knowledge of who are Creator is and how we are to relate to him and to his creation.

Concluding Note: Do not read the above as pitting Systematic Theology per se against 'Biblical Theology'. There have been many proponents of the Redemptive-Historical approach that virtually deny the ability to do coherent Systematics at all. This is going too far by far. And such a denial ultimately undermines the concept of a single divine author of the whole Bible.

Happy Birthday JE!


Today marks the 307th anniversay of the birth of Jonathan Edwards!


Monday, October 04, 2010

Russia Photos

Photos of one of my trips to Russia.
This boy came from an area that was exposed to radiation from Chernobyl.

Reading the gospel tract

Some take tracts that you don't expect!

Babushka in Riga.

Sunday, October 03, 2010

Jonathan Edwards on Pride

Written in 1742, Thoughts on the Revival in New England was the second explanation of Jonathan Edwards concerning the marks of true revival, and this section explains his thoughts on spiritual pride:

"The first and worst cause of error that prevails in our day is spiritual pride. This is the main door by which the devil comes into the hearts of those who are zealous for the advancement of Christ. It is the chief inlet of smoke from the bottomless pit to darken the mind and mislead the judgment, and the main handle by which Satan takes hold of Christians to hinder a work of God. Until this disease is cured, medicines are applied in vain to heal all other diseases.

Pride is much more difficult to discern than any other corruption because, by nature, pride is a person having too high a thought of himself. Is it any surprise, then, that a person who has too high a thought of himself is unaware of it? He thinks the opinion he has of himself has just grounds and therefore is not too high. As a result, there is no other matter in which the heart is more deceitful and unsearchable. The very nature of it is to work self-confidence and drive away any suspicion of evil respecting itself.

Pride takes many forms and shapes and encompasses the heart like the layers of an onion- when you pull off one layer, there is another underneath. Therefore, we need to have the greatest watch imaginable over our hearts with respect to this matter and to cry most earnestly to the great searcher of hearts for His help. He who trusts his own heart is a fool.

Since spiritual pride in its own nature is secretive, it cannot be well discerned by immediate intuition of the thing itself. It is best identified by its fruits and effects, some of which I will mention together with the contrary fruits of Christian humility.

The spiritually proud person is full of light already and feels that he does not need instruction, so he is ready to despise the offer of it. On the other hand, the humble person is like a little child who easily receives instruction. He is cautious in his estimate of himself, sensitive as to how liable he is to go astray. If it is suggested to him that he does go astray, he is most ready to inquire into the matter.

Proud people tend to speak of other's sins, the miserable delusion of hypocrites, the deadness of some saints with bitterness, or the opposition to holiness of many believers. Pure Christian humility, however, is silent about the sins of others, or speaks of them with grief and pity. The spiritually proud person finds fault with other saints for their lack of progress in grace, while the humble Christian sees so much evil in his own heart, and is so concerned about it, that he is not apt to be very busy with other hearts. He complains most of himself and his own spiritual coldness and readily hopes that most everybody has more love and thankfulness to God than he.

Spiritually proud people often speak of almost everything they see in others in the harshest, most severe language. Commonly, their criticism is directed against not only wicked men but also toward true children of God and those who are their superiors. The humble, however, even when they have extraordinary discoveries of God's glory, are overwhelmed with their own vileness and sinfulness. Their exhortations to fellow Christians are given in a loving and humble manner, and they treat others with as much humility and gentleness as Christ, who is infinitely above them, treats them.

Spiritual pride often disposes people to act different in external appearance, to assume a different way of speaking, countenance, or behavior. However, the humble Christian, though he will be firm in his duty; going the way of heaven alone even if all the world forsake him; yet he does not delight in being different for difference's sake. He does not try to set himself up to be viewed and observed as one distinguished, but on the contrary, is disposed to become all things to all men, to yield to others, to conform to them, and to please them in all but sin.

Proud people take great notice of opposition and injuries, and are prone to speak often about them with an air of bitterness or contempt. Christian humility, on the other hand, disposes a person to be more like his blessed Lord, who when reviled did not open His mouth but committed Himself in silence to Him who judges righteously. For the humble Christian, the more clamorous and furious the world is against him, the more silent and still he will be.

Another pattern of spiritually proud people is to behave in ways that make them the focus of others. It is natural for a person under the influence of pride to take all the respect that is paid to him. If others show a disposition to submit to him and yield in deference to him, he is open to it and freely receives it. In fact, they come to expect such treatment and to form an ill opinion of those who do not give them what they feel they deserve."

Adapted from "Some Thoughts concerning the Present Revival of Religion in New England" from The Works of Jonathan Edwards (Banner of Truth).

Saturday, October 02, 2010

Acts 1 - Study Notes

From time to time, I get the chance to teach a Sunday School class. Here are the notes from the class.

Acts 1 Bible Study – Digging Deeper

"The Acts of the Apostles" is the name given since at least the middle of the second century to the second volume of Luke's two volume history of Christian origins.

There has almost never been any doubt that the author of Acts is also the author of the third gospel. Luke 1:1-4 (Question 1 How do these statements help assure us of the historical accuracy of the Book of Acts (and the gospel of Luke)?

Theophilus -

  • It means "beloved of God" or "friend of God."
  • Little is known about him. Second-century sources indicate he was a wealthy, influential official in Antioch.
  • Theophilus was a Roman citizen who was a believer.
  • He may have been a high-ranking Roman official because Luke referred to him as "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:3). The term excellent is also used by Luke in reference to Felix and Festus, who were Roman governors (Acts 23:26, 26:25).
  • Put yourself in Theophilus’ shoes.

The scroll for Acts is 25 feet in length! It cost Luke to write these books, not only time, but also financial resources. What is God asking of us today?

Acts begins with a prologue in which Luke says that he told us in his first volume "all that Jesus began to do and teach." Acts is intended to tell us what Jesus continued to do and teach after his ascension to heaven, but now through his witnesses. We are to continue the work of evangelism and teaching that Jesus began.

What does v.1 tell us about Luke’s theme or subject for the Book of Acts?

if “Luke” is about what Jesus began to do and teach, then “Acts” is about what Jesus continues to do and teach.

Verse 2: And we are to utilize the same power that Jesus did, namely "through the Holy Spirit". Any work that we try to do or teach without the Holy Spirit is not His work.

"the apostles whom he had chosen" Jesus chose His own missionaries, taught them, and commissioned them with certain responsibilities. The same is true of all Christians: we are chosen by Christ. John 15:16.

Verse 3: "To them he presented himself alive" Luke 24: 40 – 43. – Jesus is ALIVE! He proved it! The Greek word for "proof" here is a word that includes the idea of being convincing – infallible. No other religion in the world can claim anything like this!

Appeared to them during 40 days. NT accounts of Jesus' appearances make clear that Jesus was not continually visible to the apostles during the forty days, but appeared to them on various occasions. 1 Cor 15: 5-7.

The apostles’ exposure to the proofs of the resurrection was spread over more than a month. The resurrection would become the center of every sermon they preached that is recorded in Acts.

"Speaking about the kingdom of God": A constant theme of Jesus' teaching. See, for example, Luke 4:43; 8:1; 9:11. It also a theme of the first missionaries, the Seventy, in Luke 10:1-9. As it should be with us also, preaching the coming kingdom!

Verse 4: Luke had previously recorded this request for the apostles to stay in Jerusalem (Luke 24:49) until they “were clothed with power from on high.

  • The disciples, many of whom were from Galilee, would otherwise perhaps have returned to Galilee, but Jerusalem was to be the place of the Spirit's descent. Jesus orders them to stay in Jerusalem.
  • “Don’t start ministering until you have the power to do so.”

What was the "promise of the Father" that He had told them about? The gift of the Holy Spirit. Jesus told the apostles they would receive the Holy Spirit after He left them (Luke 24:44-49, John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7; 20:22).

Verse 5: For John the Baptizer's prediction that the Messiah would baptise people with the Holy Spirit, see Mark 1:8; Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16; John 1:33.

"Not many days from now": The apostles had been with Jesus 40 days, and they would have to wait another 10 days before the Holy Spirit fell, hence, 50 days from Resurrection to Pentecost.

Verse 6: When Christ taught the apostles about the kingdom after His resurrection, they thought perhaps now He would begin His reign.

  • The apostles were probably familiar with Ezekiel 36:26 and Joel 2, which say that the kingdom will come when the Holy Spirit is poured out.
  • When they heard Christ say the Holy Spirit would come soon (v. 5), they thought He was about to set up His kingdom on earth. .
  • Notice that they do not ask, “When?”, as they had before, but the question is “At this time..?” .
  • Prophecies are found in Jeremiah 33:7; Psalms 14:7; 85:1; Hosea 6:11.
  • Did they also have hopes of having great positions of authority in the reign of the Messiah, as before? Luke 22:24-29.
  • Remember that Israel at this time could be considered a "Roman occupied territory".

Verse 7: Jesus answered the disciples' question about the time of the kingdom's coming,

  • He didn't tell them there would be no kingdom. He simply said that the time of the kingdom's coming was not for them to know.
  • If there were no literal kingdom planned for the future, Christ would have said so in Acts 1:7.
  • It is not for us to know when the Lord will return, for no man knows the day or the hour(Matt 24:36, 25:13, Mar 13:32).

Verse 8: "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you"

  • They are presently powerless. That powerlessness was manifested at the arrest of Jesus. He was arrested and all of the disciples fled into the night. They ran like frightened sheep. But there will be a change. They will receive power.
  • The Greek word is dunamis. This is the word from which derives our English words "dynamite", "dynamic" and "dynamo." It is more than mere authority. It the power of ability.

"You will be my witnesses":

  • Their task will not be speculation about the end, but filling up the time that does remain with bearing witness to Christ throughout the world.
  • A witness is simply someone who tells what he knows, what he himself has seen and heard. 1 John 1:1-2
  • The word in the Greek is where we get the term “martyrs”.
  • We are witnesses. There is no sense in which we are “to be witnesses”.

"Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" is something of an outline of the book of Acts. Chapters 1-7 = "in Jerusalem"; 8:1-11:18 = "Judea and Samaria"; and the rest of the book, "to the ends of the earth." The Holy Spirit was given for this reason: to empower the apostles to be Christ's witnesses in Jerusalem, and then on to the ends of the earth.

Verses 9: The Ascension.

For direct verbal echoes, see 2 Kings 2:9-13 (Elijah's ascension).

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you know, and the way you know.” John 14:3-4

“But now I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. John 16:5-8

Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. Rom 8:34

“and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.” Eph 1:19-21

  • While only Luke tells us the story of the Ascension, there are other possible traces of the tradition of the Ascension in Ephesians 4:8-10; 1 Timothy 3:16; John 20:17.
  • He had given them the instruction they needed, their commission, and told them to await the descent of the Spirit. His work was done and so he left them.
  • Note the quiet removal; no pomp, no ceremony, as would have certainly been the case in a legendary account.
  • Cloud the Shekinah glory of the Lord? Clouds at Trans, Ascen, Return
  • What is the point behind the Ascension? The Return

Verse 10: While they strain to look(gazing into heaven) for Jesus, two angels stood by them.

Verse 11 There is almost a reproach in the words of the two angels: "Why are you standing here looking into the sky?" It is a gentle reproach as indicated by the fact that they encourage them with the thought that the Lord will return, just as they saw him leave.

  • Why two angels?(Deut 19:15)
  • The Ascension occurred on the Mount of Olives, as we are told in v. 12.
  • He will return to the Mount of Olives, as Zechariah tells us... Zech 14: 4-5
  • The same Christ who ascended into heaven in Acts 1:9 will return the same way. He won't be different. He will return in the same glorified body that the disciples saw when Christ joined them for breakfast by the Sea of Galilee in John 21:4-14.

  1. He said that He would leave (John 6:62, 20:17).
  2. He said that He needed to leave in order for the Spirit to come
  3. He needed to make the disciples realize that He would not be appearing to them again
  4. He is now interceding for us in heaven
  5. He will be returning the same way He left

Application: Knowing that Christ will return someday should motivate us to serve Him diligently. Someday we will all appear before the judgment seat of Christ to receive rewards for what we did while on earth (2 Cor. 5:10). Christ said, "Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be" (Rev. 22:12). One of the greatest motivators for serving Jesus is that He will reward us for what we have done.

Verse 12: They were on the Mount of Olives for the Ascension. The spot was a Sabbath days journey – how far? Half mile?

Verse 13: They go to the Upper Room where they were staying.

  • The disciples most likely gathered in the same upper room where the Last Supper was held and where Jesus appeared to them after His resurrection.
  • In those days, houses frequently had upper rooms or chambers. The upper rooms were like living rooms. It was a place for fellowship or devotions.
  • In Acts 9 we read a dead widow named Dorcas was placed in an upper room prior to her planned burial (she was resurrected by Peter).

Eleven Apostles The list of apostles is the same as in Luke 6:14-16 except Judas Iscariot

Verse 14: Everybody was together praying.

  • While the disciples were waiting for the Holy Spirit, they didn't just stay in the upper room. Luke 24:53 says they "were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God."
  • So the upper room served as a meeting place.
  • One thing they weren't praying for was the coming of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit's coming didn't depend on their prayers. Acts 1:4 says that the Holy Spirit was a promise of the Father. They already had the promise; it was just a matter of waiting. In fact when the Spirit did come in Acts 2:2, the people weren't even in prayer.

"The women" were probably the ladies who were with Jesus throughout His ministry, death, and resurrection:

  • Mary Magdalene,
  • Mary the wife of Clopis,
  • Mary and Martha, Salome, and perhaps others (cf. Luke 8:1-3). Acts 1:14 says that the disciples were praying with Mary, not to her.
  • This is the last mention of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
  • Christ's mother and half-brothers were also in the upper room. (James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude--whom we see mentioned in Matthew 13:55
  • Christ's brothers at one time weren't believers, but they became believers by the time Acts 1 was written.
  • How did they become saved? Scripture doesn't say, but I think it may have happened when James saw Christ after the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:4, 7).
  • Who else was there with the 120? Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimethea..?

Fear of the Jews - John 20:19 “..when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you."

The overarching principle at this point in the disciples lives is not so much that they spent time rejoicing at the Temple and praying in the upper room, but that they were obedient to Christ's command to stay in Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit came.

Verse 15: During the 10 day wait between Ascension and Pentecost, business needed to be done.

  • Peter stood up among the brethren – leader or among equals?
  • About 120 in the company. But their small number was made up by the power they derived from God.
  • Within thirty years the gospel spread all over the known world and penetrated Rome.
  • They were people just like us.

Verse 16: Scripture to be fulfilled. Holy Spirit spoke - by David - concerning Judas.

  • Judas was a guide to those who arrested Jesus.
  • The Old Testament prophesied that Judas would be replaced (Ps. 109:8), so the change was a part of God's plan.
  • Peter reassured them that God's plan wasn't thwarted because Judas betrayed Jesus.
  • God doesn't lose those who really belong to Him.
  • Judas's betrayal fulfilled Scripture. That doesn't mean God made Judas betray Jesus; it simply means that He used Judas's actions to accomplish His purpose.
  • God can work through men whether they are saved or not.

Verse 17: Judas was one of their number.

  • At this time, the disciples were all probably wondering why Judas betrayed Jesus.
  • Christ had told them that one day the disciples would sit on twelve thrones (Matt. 19:28), but now there were only eleven disciples.
  • So the things Peter says are a message from God that Judas's betrayal was expected, and that the prophecy in Matthew 19:28 wasn't wrong.

Verse 18: Judas bought a field with the 30 pieces of silver, and died in it.

  • These verses tell a different story from Matthew of how the Field got its name.
  • Here the blood is Judas’ rather than Jesus’.
  • “falling headlong”: Literally flat or prone.

Verse 19: “their language”: i.e. Aramaic, a dialect related to Hebrew.

“Blood”: Here the “blood” in question is that of the betrayer; in Matthew 27:4-5, it is that of the betrayed.

Verse 20 Psalm 69:26

Verses 21-22: Note that Paul does not meet the requirements for being an apostle (not being with Jesus throughout his earthly ministry), but 1 Cor15:8-9: but traceability to Jesus was still required.

Note that Luke does not suppress Paul’s claim to be an apostle: in Acts 14:4 Luke writes “When the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it ...”.

Verse 22: The “baptism of John” marks the start of Jesus’ ministry: see Mark 1:1-4 and Acts 10:37 (Peter’s teaches at Cornelius’ house). This verse is a summary of vv. 1-5.

Verse 23: This verse sets us up to expect the election of Joseph; it is almost as though he was better known than Matthias.

Verse 26: “they cast lots”: This is no casting of votes, for it is God who does the choosing (v. 24) via the incalculable lots. Prov 16:33The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the LORD.”

First, then, in the place of Judas, the betrayer, Matthias, who, as has been shown was also one of the Seventy, was chosen to the apostolate. Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius of Caesarea,

Application: The call of Matthias reminds me of a story told by Fred Craddock about his own ministry and sense of call. Craddock says that he always imagined that someday he'd do something really great, he'd be a martyr for Jesus. There'd be a monument built for him to recognize his deed and people would come by and read "Here's where Fred gave it all for Jesus."

He always thought his call would play out as a spectacular $100 bill kind of experience. But then he came to realize that his ministry was actually about giving lectures, reading books, grading papers, going to meetings. He knew he'd finally accepted that call when he took the $100 bill to the bank and said, "give it to me in quarters." Now, Craddock says, he lives out his call one ordinary quarter at a time.

Friday, October 01, 2010

Walking Dead Trailer

Posting it here because:

It looks very cool

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg46DWI_fCE

Omaha Zoo Photos

They have a nice aquarium with sharks...

...a cool train...

...big kitties who stare at you..

..a new baby seal....just born a few days before...

..peacocks..of course!