ABR#1 Acts of the Apostles

I have begun to read the Bible alphabetically (see here for my rationale), reading each book three times (in different translations) and trying to get into the mind of the original author and readers as well as listen to God’s message for today. Here’s what I’ve discovered from reading Acts.

Characters
There are two main characters, Peter and Paul, whose stories overlap in the middle. They have many experiences in common – miracles, visions, being hauled before the authorities, imprisonment (and miraculous release), healings (directly, and indirectly via shadows and handkerchiefs) and raising the dead. But there are also numerous others who are filled with the Holy Spirit and play an active part in the spread of the gospel – Stephen, Philip, James, Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, Aquila and Priscilla to name but a few.

Examples of recurring characters: 1) When Paul and his companions were on their way back to Jerusalem, whom did they stay with at Caesarea? None other than Philip the deacon/evangelist – who by now had four daughters who were also preaching the gospel. 2) Gamaliel, who argued for a ‘wait-and-see’ policy in the early days is later cited by Paul as his mentor when he was training in Jerusalem. (NB Paul’s initial policy in those early days was not ‘wait and see’ but ‘kill the heretics!’) 3) The prophet Agabus appears at the start of Paul’s travels, predicting a famine, and at the end, warning of his fate in Jerusalem. 4) On escaping from prison Peter goes to the house of John Mark’s mother. Shortly after John Mark himself goes with Saul and Barnabas to help in their work.

Authorship
This is clearly a sequel to Luke’s gospel, but who is Theophilus, to whom Luke addresses both books? One theory is that Theophilus was Paul’s defence lawyer. Whilst awaiting trial in Caesarea and again in Rome, Luke, in consultation with Paul, prepared two briefing papers for him setting out the facts of a) Jesus’s life and b) Paul’s part in the spread of the Christian message.
This would explain certain features such as the focus on Paul for the last half of the book and the time taken on details such as the reporting of the plot against Paul. (The report of who said what to whom, between nephew, Paul, centurion and commandant, seems needlessly long-winded but is just the sort of thing a lawyer would be interested in.)
They obviously had lawyers in those days (Tertullus for example spoke on behalf of the High Priest), but to be honest this theory about Theophilus seems a trifle too neat to be true.

The Message
What was this new message which the disciples were so keen to spread? Three responses were called for again and again.
Repent – turn away from your wicked ways, seek forgiveness, change your lifestyle. Why? The appeal is to be saved but it is not specified from what. The sermons don’t major on how sinful people are. Perhaps everyone was well aware they were living in a corrupt society which needed some drastic shake-up. The criticisms are mostly corporate (living in a crooked age) rather than individual, and the only real sin highlighted is rejecting God’s prophets and God’s message, and in particular rejecting Jesus.
Believe – accept the facts about Jesus (especially his resurrection) as true, trust in him as a living person. Why? God is doing something new and wonderful in Jesus. You need to get on board. This is a key motivation in the early sermons. There is no threat of hell (though there are a few references to judgement); no promise of heaven; no warning that Christ will return imminently; no explanation about the cross as the means of salvation. In Jewish circles the focus is on Jesus being the promised Messiah, but otherwise there is very little theological justification for the call to believe.
Be Baptised – in water obviously, but no detail is given about the exact method. Why? It is associated with the coming of the Holy Spirit into a person’s life.

Some specific lessons
God often chooses to work through designated human agents. Saul’s eyesight is restored through Ananias. The church in Joppa send for Peter when Tabitha dies. God answers Cornelius’ prayer by sending Peter. When the sons of Sceva try to cast out an evil spirit on Paul’s behalf, rather than sending for the man himself, it all goes horribly pear-shaped.

Paul and co-workers stayed in Ephesus for a few years and their work flourished. Yet in the near-riot when the crowds were chanting “great is Artemis of the Ephesians” the town clerk was able to claim that the Christians had never spoken evil against Artemis. Clearly they were managing to do what we try to do today – proclaim and spread the Christian faith without causing offence to those of other faiths.

The story of Ananias and Sapphira shows God is not to be trifled with. When it comes to explaining my actions to the church council I have never (as far as I remember) come up with an out-and-out lie, but I have often put a huge spin on my report in order to put myself in the best possible light. For example I might say that I am “working on it” when I actually mean “I’ve not started it yet but I’m on the verge of doing so”. Thus far I have never fallen dead in a church council, but I ought to take seriously the issue of misleading my fellow Christians and bear in mind that if I compromise my integrity it is really God that I am lying to.

Here’s a thought: What happened to all those people Jesus had an impact on during his ministry in Judea, Samaria and Galilee? When the new message spread through these regions, it was only a few years after Jesus had been amongst them in person. Did these ‘old’ followers hear the message of resurrection and become ‘new’ followers? Was the change in the life of (for example) Zaccheus incomplete until he had responded to the preaching of the early church? Whatever the answers, one thing is easily overlooked – in some parts of the world the gospel of Jesus was not a brand new concept but additional information regarding a well-known figure. Not so different after all to the environment in which evangelists work today.

Miscellaneous details
Stephen’s account of Jewish history portrays Moses as the archetype of the ‘rejected prophet’ who came to save but initially wasn’t listened to. Stephen was preparing his audience to see Jesus in similar terms.

Paul inflicts on Barjesus, a sorcerer on Cyprus, the same fate he suffered himself on the road to Damascus – condemnation of his opposition to God followed by a time of blindness. It is not recorded whether this led to a conversion.

Reading the Bible alphabetically

I returned from the Christian Resources Exhibition having heard two speakers and bought one book written by each. I also returned with a desire to read the Bible differently. But how?

The first speaker was David Pawson. His key point was that the Bible is a library of books and that each book should be read in it's entirety. He pointed out that no-one would read an Agatha Christie novel by dipping into chapter 7, then reading a few verses from chapter 3 then skipping to the last page. This is true, though his analogy applies more to some Bible books than others. We wouldn't sit down and read a hymn book or a book of quotations from cover to cover. (Hence Psalms and Proverbs may not be best suited to a simple novel-like approach.) However I was impressed enough by his insights that I bought "Unlocking the Bible" - a huge tome full of background information. To be honest, his understanding of Scripture is much more literal than I am comfortable with, but he is easy to listen to (and hopefully to read) and I'm happy to hear his views even if I decide not to agree.

A second speaker was Nick Page who I feel closer to theologically and whose common sense is seasoned with a sprinkling of quirky humour. He too has written a guide (albeit one third the size) called "The Bible Book". The introduction uses the analogy of exploring two continents, each with its own regions ('history' or 'letters' for example) and 66 variously sized towns. There are many popular tourist attractions to be visited, but also some fascinating things to discover off the beaten track.

My plan therefore is to take a book of the Bible, read it through for myself, read what Mr Pawson and Mr Page have to say, and any other insights I can find from other sources (Wikipedia springs to mind), then read it at least once more in a different translation. The aim is to spend time (anything from a few days to a few weeks) really getting to grips with that book before moving on to the next.

The only remaining question is what order to read the books. An obvious answer is in the order they appear in the Bible. An alternative (preferred by David Pawson) is chronologically, which is not radically different to the usual order. Having read the Bible twice through over the last decade I feel I am familiar enough with the overview not to need this approach. One book at a time will do me fine, and a bit of variety, hopping from history to prophecy to epistles would help keep up my interest. So I said to myself - what about alphabetically?

This has a lot to commend it. It provides enough discipline so that I don't just read what I feel like. It will take me back and forth from Old to New Testaments and mix up the different styles of literature. The first book in ths scheme is Acts, which is in many ways a good place to start, especially with the approach of Pentecost.

The only spanner in the works is that if I stick strictly to alphabetical order I will end up reading the three synoptic gospels in succession (with only Malachi as a short break). Hence I will promote Mark to somewhere around D and postpone Matthew to somewhere around R. Otherwise I'm ready for off. I don't expect to reach Zephaniah until 2012.