A consideration of Acts 1-8

[Twinky]

Here’s a verse which always seemed a little “off” to me (all quotes from The Message, which I read occasionally for its freshness and vitality).

Acts 6

1 During this time, as the disciples were increasing in numbers by leaps and bounds, hard feelings developed among the Greek-speaking believers - "Hellenists" - toward the Hebrew-speaking believers because their widows were being discriminated against in the daily food lines. 2 So the Twelve called a meeting of the disciples. They said, "It wouldn't be right for us to abandon our responsibilities for preaching and teaching the Word of God to help with the care of the poor. 3 So, friends, choose seven men from among you whom everyone trusts, men full of the Holy Spirit and good sense, and we'll assign them this task. 4 Meanwhile, we'll stick to our assigned tasks of prayer and speaking God's Word."

Last night this verse suddenly pinged into new vision (as it were). I have never seen or heard anything taught like this so offer it for considered opinion. I could be completely off the wall.

So right from the beginning, the apostles didn’t want to get involved with the poor. Excuse me, hadn’t they spent enough time with Jesus, walking the streets, talking to all and sundry?

(Doesn’t this sound a bit like the Pope refusing to leave the Vatican, other church leaders preferring to stay in their palaces, houses and comfort places; even wannabe ministry leaders living in log cabins? But I don’t want to derail my own thread here!)

Here is the actual commission, the last words of the Lord Jesus Christ to them:

Acts 1

4 As they met and ate meals together, he told them that they were on no account to leave Jerusalem but "must wait for what the Father promised: the promise you heard from me. 5 John baptized in water; you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. And soon."

6 When they were together for the last time they asked, "Master, are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel now? Is this the time?" 7 He told them, "You don't get to know the time. Timing is the Father's business. 8 What you'll get is the Holy Spirit. And when the Holy Spirit comes on you, you will be able to be my witnesses in Jerusalem, all over Judea and Samaria, even to the ends of the world." 9 These were his last words.

So. They're told to wait for a few days – get the gift of holy spirit – then they are to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and elsewhere. They weren’t told to wait around afterwards. Weren’t told to stay in Jerusalem. Were told to “get out there.”

So why do we find them quite a long time later – still in Jerusalem?

Acts 2

41 That day about three thousand took him at his word, were baptized and were signed up.

42 They committed themselves to the teaching of the apostles, the life together, the common meal, and the prayers. 43 Everyone around was in awe - all those wonders and signs done through the apostles! 44 And all the believers lived in a wonderful harmony, holding everything in common. 45 They sold whatever they owned and pooled their resources so that each person's need was met. 46 They followed a daily discipline of worship in the Temple followed by meals at home, every meal a celebration, exuberant and joyful, 47 as they praised God. People in general liked what they saw. Every day their number grew as God added those who were saved.

This activity took time. Yes, they had 3,000 new converts and more added daily. But they built a routine, and took time to sell property.

Here we are in Acts 4:

32 The whole congregation of believers was united as one - one heart, one mind! They didn't even claim ownership of their own possessions. No one said, "That's mine; you can't have it." They shared everything. 33 The apostles gave powerful witness to the resurrection of the Master Jesus, and grace was on all of them. 34 And so it turned out that not a person among them was needy. Those who owned fields or houses sold them and brought the price of the sale 35 to the apostles and made an offering of it. The apostles then distributed it according to each person's need.

36 Joseph, called by the apostles "Barnabas" (which means "Son of Comfort"), a Levite born in Cyprus, 37 sold a field that he owned, brought the money, and made an offering of it to the apostles.

More selling of property and lands. The time this might have taken…

And clearly, it’s not that the apostles were the only ones who knew the Word at it was lately revealed. There were other instructed ones and they could have taught. Here we see Joseph/Barnabas who was clearly instructed and able to follow the teachings. He could have worked with some of the new converts in Jerusalem. He probably wasn’t the only one.

It also seems the apostles didn’t carry out their self-assigned task of teaching properly either.

There is big persecution after Stephen’s death (how much longer after the first Pentecost is this?). Believers are scattered all over. Phillip witnesses and opens up Samaria, but although a wonderful man, he himself perhaps wasn’t fully instructed:

Acts 8:

14 When the apostles in Jerusalem received the report that Samaria had accepted God's Message, they sent Peter and John down 15 to pray for them to receive the Holy Spirit. 16 Up to this point they had only been baptized in the name of the Master Jesus; the Holy Spirit hadn't yet fallen on them. 17 Then the apostles laid their hands on them and they did receive the Holy Spirit.

Why hadn’t the apostles taught Phillip that far? Keeping knowledge to themselves? Didn’t fully share with Phillip? Phillip didn’t understand? We can speculate about that.

Meanwhile, the apostles go back to Jerusalem, witnessing as they go:

25 And with that, the apostles were on their way, continuing to witness and spread the Message of God's salvation, preaching in every Samaritan town they passed through on their return to Jerusalem.

And much later we find Peter and John getting legalistic and refusing to eat with Gentiles when there are Jews around…. They also tell Paul that they will stick with witnessing to the Jews and refuse to go to the Gentiles, telling him that his ministry.

I think there may well be a reason why Jesus didn’t tell them to stick around in Jerusalem. Do the business, then get out into the rest of the country and the rest of the world, witnessing. Don’t stick in one place, no matter how good it all looks. JC knew the legalism there would kill their ministry, just as legalism had killed his earthly body.

Sure, they moved with power, miracles happened, people were born again - it must have been an amazing and thrilling time.

Maybe, just maybe, if they had moved on soon after Pentecost, having taught worthy converts what they needed to know – maybe, just maybe, things would have been very different. (You can be dead right but dead wrong!)

Perhaps Stephen wouldn’t have been martyred. Perhaps Saul (Paul) wouldn’t have witnessed his death. Perhaps Paul wouldn’t have been converted and gone on to receive the revelation that he did. Perhaps Peter or John would have received it instead.

God is big enough to get His Word out there. The Lord Jesus Christ is big enough to take care of his church.

[brideofjc]

Here’s a verse which always seemed a little “off” to me (all quotes from The Message, which I read occasionally for its freshness and vitality).

Acts 6

1 During this time, as the disciples were increasing in numbers by leaps and bounds, hard feelings developed among the Greek-speaking believers - "Hellenists" - toward the Hebrew-speaking believers because their widows were being discriminated against in the daily food lines. 2 So the Twelve called a meeting of the disciples. They said, "It wouldn't be right for us to abandon our responsibilities for preaching and teaching the Word of God to help with the care of the poor. 3 So, friends, choose seven men from among you whom everyone trusts, men full of the Holy Spirit and good sense, and we'll assign them this task. 4 Meanwhile, we'll stick to our assigned tasks of prayer and speaking God's Word."

Last night this verse suddenly pinged into new vision (as it were). I have never seen or heard anything taught like this so offer it for considered opinion. I could be completely off the wall.

So right from the beginning, the apostles didn’t want to get involved with the poor. Excuse me, hadn’t they spent enough time with Jesus, walking the streets, talking to all and sundry?

(Doesn’t this sound a bit like the Pope refusing to leave the Vatican, other church leaders preferring to stay in their palaces, houses and comfort places; even wannabe ministry leaders living in log cabins? But I don’t want to derail my own thread here!)

here is the actual commission, the last words of the Lord Jesus Christ to them:

Acts 1

4 As they met and ate meals together, he told them that they were on no account to leave Jerusalem but "must wait for what the Father promised: the promise you heard from me. 5 John baptized in water; you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. And soon."

6 When they were together for the last time they asked, "Master, are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel now? Is this the time?" 7 He told them, "You don't get to know the time. Timing is the Father's business. 8 What you'll get is the Holy Spirit. And when the Holy Spirit comes on you, you will be able to be my witnesses in Jerusalem, all over Judea and Samaria, even to the ends of the world." 9 These were his last words.

So. They're told to wait for a few days – get the gift of holy spirit – then they are to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and elsewhere. They weren’t told to wait around afterwards. Weren’t told to stay in Jerusalem. Were told to “get out there.”

So why do we find them quite a long time later – still in Jerusalem?

Hello Twinky!

There isn't any timeframe attached to the Lord's commandment. In fact, we still haven't reached the ends of the world and Judea and Samaria have very little Christian presence as a matter of fact. Perhaps, we all need to move to Jerusalem and try it again, huh?

And considering the fact that many new people were pouring into the church at record numbers it is only understandable that since the Apostles had spent at least three years living in direct communion with the Lord Jesus, that they should be thought to be the head teachers. There is nothing odd in their decision to leave off serving people directly by cleaning tables, etc. why should they? Weren't there by now at the minimum 3000 and more pouring in daily? When you bear such a heavy load of leadership, you cannot possibly do everything yourself without killing yourself. Plus, your idea of being "out there" is kinda out there. I don't believe the Lord Jesus expected his disciples to go to the ends of the earth and abandon their families to homelessness and starvation. It wasn't in those days like it is today, where the abandoned wife can claim hubby's SS check and get public aid, food stamps, etc. Even when Philip went out, he eventually moved to Ceasarea with his family and basically started a home church. You have to have people willing to stay in an area and set up a "church-like" structure, if you will, while others move on to new areas.

Acts 2

41 That day about three thousand took him at his word, were baptized and were signed up.

42 They committed themselves to the teaching of the apostles, the life together, the common meal, and the prayers. 43 Everyone around was in awe - all those wonders and signs done through the apostles! 44 And all the believers lived in a wonderful harmony, holding everything in common. 45 They sold whatever they owned and pooled their resources so that each person's need was met. 46 They followed a daily discipline of worship in the Temple followed by meals at home, every meal a celebration, exuberant and joyful, 47 as they praised God. People in general liked what they saw. Every day their number grew as God added those who were saved.

This activity took time. Yes, they had 3,000 new converts and more added daily. But they built a routine, and took time to sell property.

Here we are in Acts 4:

32 The whole congregation of believers was united as one - one heart, one mind! They didn't even claim ownership of their own possessions. No one said, "That's mine; you can't have it." They shared everything. 33 The apostles gave powerful witness to the resurrection of the Master Jesus, and grace was on all of them. 34 And so it turned out that not a person among them was needy. Those who owned fields or houses sold them and brought the price of the sale 35 to the apostles and made an offering of it. The apostles then distributed it according to each person's need.

36 Joseph, called by the apostles "Barnabas" (which means "Son of Comfort"), a Levite born in Cyprus, 37 sold a field that he owned, brought the money, and made an offering of it to the apostles.

More selling of property and lands. The time this might have taken…

And clearly, it’s not that the apostles were the only ones who knew the Word at it was lately revealed. There were other instructed ones and they could have taught. Here we see Joseph/Barnabas who was clearly instructed and able to follow the teachings. He could have worked with some of the new converts in Jerusalem. He probably wasn’t the only one.

And I am sure they did do some teaching and maybe a good portion. You need to remember they were not one giant congregation, but were meeting in small fellowships around the city. Beside, if you are in leadership, there is much praying to be done and waiting upon the Lord and fasting. You cannot do everything.

It also seems the apostles didn’t carry out their self-assigned task of teaching properly either.

Can you cite verses to substantiate this?

There is big persecution after Stephen’s death (how much longer after the first Pentecost is this?). Believers are scattered all over. Phillip witnesses and opens up Samaria, but although a wonderful man, he himself perhaps wasn’t fully instructed:

Is anyone ever FULLY INSTRUCTED? That's rather a misgnomer IMO. That's why you have to seek the Lord, even today. And then, the Lord Jesus didn't teach them everything they could have had. Their understanding developed over time per se on the written prophecies in the OT concerning the Lord Jesus. These things weren't learned in a day.

Acts 8:

14 When the apostles in Jerusalem received the report that Samaria had accepted God's Message, they sent Peter and John down 15 to pray for them to receive the Holy Spirit. 16 Up to this point they had only been baptized in the name of the Master Jesus; the Holy Spirit hadn't yet fallen on them. 17 Then the apostles laid their hands on them and they did receive the Holy Spirit.

Why hadn’t the apostles taught Phillip that far? Keeping knowledge to themselves? Didn’t fully share with Phillip? Phillip didn’t understand? We can speculate about that.

Perhaps the Lord instructed them through HIS Holy Spirit to do it that way. How do we know that the new converts didn't try to lay hands on people, and perhaps nothing happened except when the Apostles did it. If so, then this is what pleased the Lord! Being in tune with the Holy Spirit takes considerable time, prayer, fasting and waiting upon Him and learning to hear HIS voice.

Meanwhile, the apostles go back to Jerusalem, witnessing as they go:

25 And with that, the apostles were on their way, continuing to witness and spread the Message of God's salvation, preaching in every Samaritan town they passed through on their return to Jerusalem.

And much later we find Peter and John getting legalistic and refusing to eat with Gentiles when there are Jews around…. They also tell Paul that they will stick with witnessing to the Jews and refuse to go to the Gentiles, telling him that his ministry.

I think there may well be a reason why Jesus didn’t tell them to stick around in Jerusalem. Do the business, then get out into the rest of the country and the rest of the world, witnessing. Don’t stick in one place, no matter how good it all looks. JC knew the legalism there would kill their ministry, just as legalism had killed his earthly body.

Ok, Twinky, process that! You go to a place, stick around just long enough to get people born again, perhaps SIT, then you split. Now what happens to those new converts when they begin to have questions about what you taught to them? Tough!? Come on the road with us? It should be apparent that someone HAS to MAN THE FORT at some point.

Sure, they moved with power, miracles happened, people were born again - it must have been an amazing and thrilling time.

Maybe, just maybe, if they had moved on soon after Pentecost, having taught worthy converts what they needed to know – maybe, just maybe, things would have been very different. (You can be dead right but dead wrong!)

Perhaps Stephen wouldn’t have been martyred. Perhaps Saul (Paul) wouldn’t have witnessed his death. Perhaps Paul wouldn’t have been converted and gone on to receive the revelation that he did. Perhaps Peter or John would have received it instead.

God is big enough to get His Word out there. The Lord Jesus Christ is big enough to take care of his church.

Yes, HE IS and it was probably allowed of the Lord that such a great persecution hit the church when it did, because it forced those who could leave to do just that and thus the Word of God began to be spread into Judea and Samaria, etc.

God does know what HE IS DOING! and even when we disobey, HE still gets HIS WAY!

[Twinky]

You really have to consider what the apostles did in light of what Paul did. And also JC.

Previously, we've seen Jesus on his travels wandering up and down the country. He finds himself in Samaria and spends a long time talking to a woman (way beyond cultural boundaries). Because of her witness, many believed. Jesus knew Samaria was ready to receive the Word. Ready to receive news of him. Ready to receive the great post-Pentecost message.

John 4:

31 In the meantime, the disciples pressed him, "Rabbi, eat. Aren't you going to eat?" 32 He told them, "I have food to eat you know nothing about." 33 The disciples were puzzled. "Who could have brought him food?"

34 Jesus said, "The food that keeps me going is that I do the will of the One who sent me, finishing the work he started. 35 As you look around right now, wouldn't you say that in about four months it will be time to harvest? Well, I'm telling you to open your eyes and take a good look at what's right in front of you. These Samaritan fields are ripe. It's harvest time! 36 "The Harvester isn't waiting. He's taking his pay, gathering in this grain that's ripe for eternal life. Now the Sower is arm in arm with the Harvester, triumphant. 37 That's the truth of the saying, 'This one sows, that one harvests.' 38 I sent you to harvest a field you never worked. Without lifting a finger, you have walked in on a field worked long and hard by others."

39 Many of the Samaritans from that village committed themselves to him because of the woman's witness: "

These are people considered unbelievers by the Jews. So JC and the apostles/disciples stayed there just a little while, and then moved on. No record of JC or anyone else revisiting when he/they next passed through that area.

Now, why do you think in his last instruction to the apostles, he told them to get out to Samaria? Because it was ready! And they had seen it with their own eyes! But they wouldn't (even now) move out of their own cultural taboos.

Later:

Paul moved around the land of the Gentiles, setting up home churches, instructing some people very fully, and then appointing leaders. Then he moved on, starting more home fellowships elsewhere. He came back frequently to check on how they were doing, and wrote letters to the churches exhorting and warning them.

Now this is among people who did not even have the OT to begin with. They worshiped idols, debated endlessly, etc, but did not have the understanding that the Jews did. Yet they turned wholeheartedly to what Paul was teaching.

I do think this is perhaps what JC had in mind for the apostles to do.

I'm suggesting that the apostles hanging around in Jerusalem is perhaps a little in the light of Paul wilfully going to Jerusalem ('cos it's so holy you know) despite warnings that ill-treatment awaited him there. He didn't do what God wanted him to. Yet God still blessed and honored his commitment and gave him great revelation, even whilst he was in prison in Rome.

Don't forget the apostles lived in Galilee. That's their family home. Where their homes were.

They were only in Jerusalem on a temporary visit, for a major festival. Maybe with, maybe without, their families. Doesn't say they decamped permanently from Galilee. Yet they just stayed and stayed.

I don't believe the Lord Jesus expected his disciples to go to the ends of the earth and abandon their families to homelessness and starvation.

Read what JC commanded them; don't argue with me.

Perhaps he intended their families to remain in Galilee whilst they made journeys elsewhere.

Like Paul did.

I'm just saying - have another look.

Think about it. What's the bigger picture?

[Twinky]

It was probably allowed of the Lord that such a great persecution hit the church when it did, because it forced those who could leave to do just that and thus the Word of God began to be spread into Judea and Samaria, etc.

I think you're making my point, here.

If the apostles had got out and done what they were commanded to do, there may not have been a great persecution such that the word got spread everywhere. It would already have been everywhere.

Your word: "forced".

The love of God does not "force" us but exhorts, commands, encourages - leaves it to our freewill to obey. As Jesus exhorted, commanded, encouraged, his apostles. But did they match that with obedience? Precise obedience?

[T-Bone]

As far as Acts 6, I don't believe the twelve were out of touch with reality or wanting a desk job – I just think they were staying focused on their primary role [alluded to in verse 4…but think about it – they were apostles – that was a HUGE assignment all in itself! You may want to revisit the Apostles, Prophets and prophecy thread, link below ].

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...st&p=312563

And while on the subject of apostles – your question of why the apostles hadn't taught Philip some things in Acts 8 – so they had to send in Peter and John. I tend to think it again goes back to this unique role of apostles. II Corinthians 12:12 speaks about the signs of a true apostle. I'm of the opinion that the miraculous signs done by the apostles were for the purpose of authentication – in other words – they were indeed God's messengers [see Acts 2:22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 14:3]. Of course, I could be wrong – then it goes back to yeah, why didn't they train Philip better?

Getting back to Acts 6, I think verses 1-7 is a good example of a wise decision-making process used by all those involved… And while we're talking about decision-making and wondering about how events came about or play out [like the stoning of Stephen] – I think we're all at a loss for really knowing/understanding all the dynamics involved. That is a matter of taking into account God's sovereignty & foreknowledge as well as the freewill decisions of everyone that touches each incident…

...It's something to think about in light of Romans 8:28 [God causing all things to work together for good…] – that through the good and bad times, through the good intentions & decisions of people…in spite of sinful motives & bad decisions – God, as a master conductor, orchestrates everything to work in harmony with His masterpiece. In real time - what we may interpret as one instrument being totally off key, out of sync, or think it doesn't belong there – God may be using that very dissonance to propel His piece into the next passage.

I know this orchestrating analogy is hokey – but thinking about Acts 8 and 9 this way – the stoning of Stephen and the conversion of Paul – the two accounts don't appear as disjointed. I'm thinking every detail of Stephen's stoning that Saul witnessed - had a profound effect on his cement encrusted heart – like chisels, chipping away at that hardened layer of Pharisaic theology – preparing the way for Jesus' words to touch his heart.

God's sovereignty/man's freewill is an interesting subject all by itself – and a fun one to explore in conjunction with the book of Acts…there's a lively discussion of God's foreknowledge on the What does God know? thread:

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...st&p=364531

Edited March 14, 2008 by T-Bone

[RachelYsrael]

Acts 6:1

And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministrations...

I believe this section is referring to not a spiritual neglect, but a carnal one. Jeruselem was under Roman occupation, and the Hebrews were the hired help. Many of them were slaves. So as more Israelites believed on Jesus, the daily tasks of servitude was suffering. This is why they they said it is not reason that they should leave the Word of God and SERVE TABLES...We are exhorted in the Word to do all things with a spiritual outlook, so they appointed 7 men that met spiritual requirements to coordinate the care of the the Greek women that were widows. I don't believe this service had anything to do with the Word of God, other than it had to be done.

Rachel

[brideofjc]

Now, why do you think in his last instruction to the apostles, he told them to get out to Samaria? Because it was ready! And they had seen it with their own eyes! But they wouldn't (even now) move out of their own cultural taboos.

Ok, look at the order that they were to do this: Jerusalem - why? Because it was a large metropolis that was the centerpiece of Judaism and wherein the prophecies had to be completed and fulfilled. The Lord never does his works, especially one this major, concerning the fulfillment of His prophetic utterances, concerning His Son, as if it were a hole in the corner. The feast of Pentecost was a harvest feast and could very well have signified (I believe it is in Isaiah also) where the prophecy was uttered that the reapers would overtake the sowers. Prior to the advent of the Lord Jesus there was a 400 year silence from God Almighty, which is now labeled as the intertestamental period. Being that they had just come out of winter, which is likened to a time of death and the earth itself is silent while it is waiting for spring. Kind of poetic isn't it? 400 years of winter, then the Lord God Almighty begins to move and sends His Son into the world and then comes the harvest feast of winter grains at Pentecost, then a bursting forth of Holy Spirit that shook the world.

Then the Lord Jesus told them to go into Judea, away from Jerusalem to tell them what had just happened at Jerusalem and to begin to connect the dots of the first covenant prophecies to what had been accomplished in the Lord Jesus and then at Pentecost. These would have been Jews who knew the prophecies, so no problems with translational issues or cultural issues either.

Then next came Samaria: now these people were basically half breeds, part Gentile pagan and part Jew, which is why they were so despised. They had a form of Judaism but it was richly mixed with their former pagan ways, but they were also familiar with the first testamental prophecies and therefore they could also relate. Besides which it wouldn't have been that long since the woman at the well had been approached by the Lord Jesus Himself and they would have this uppermost in their minds as well. For they waited for Messaiah as well.

Then the ends of the earth: we are still working on that one.

Later:

Paul moved around the land of the Gentiles, setting up home churches, instructing some people very fully, and then appointing leaders. Then he moved on, starting more home fellowships elsewhere. He came back frequently to check on how they were doing, and wrote letters to the churches exhorting and warning them.

Now this is among people who did not even have the OT to begin with. They worshiped idols, debated endlessly, etc, but did not have the understanding that the Jews did. Yet they turned wholeheartedly to what Paul was teaching.

I do think this is perhaps what JC had in mind for the apostles to do.

But who has known the mind of the Lord?

Don't forget the apostles lived in Galilee. That's their family home. Where their homes were.

They were only in Jerusalem on a temporary visit, for a major festival. Maybe with, maybe without, their families. Doesn't say they decamped permanently from Galilee. Yet they just stayed and stayed.

It also doesn't say that they didn't leave Galilee permanently either. When it came time for the feasts, the male had to appear at least three times per year, if I remember correctly, sometimes with the family and sometimes not. But if they didn't have their families with them for the feast, no upstanding Jewish man would leave his family to fend for themselves. So it is a good bet that after Pentecost happened and they began to obey the Lord's commandment, that they went and got their families first. When the Lord Jesus commanded them to start in Jerusalem, who is to say that the Lord before He ascended didn't command them to set up HQ right there. Since we weren't there in those teaching sessions it becomes only guesswork and then we have to permanently camp in "Guess-a-rama" land which tends to get rather boring. It is far easier to deal with what is actually written than to commit the fallacy of eisegesis.

Read what JC commanded them; don't argue with me.

By which statement you reveal your polemics!

Perhaps he intended their families to remain in Galilee whilst they made journeys elsewhere.

Like Paul did.

"Guess-a-rama" land.

I'm just saying - have another look.

Think about it. What's the bigger picture?

Edited March 14, 2008 by brideofjc

[brideofjc]

I think you're making my point, here.

If the apostles had got out and done what they were commanded to do, there may not have been a great persecution such that the word got spread everywhere. It would already have been everywhere.

Your word: "forced".

The love of God does not "force" us but exhorts, commands, encourages - leaves it to our freewill to obey. As Jesus exhorted, commanded, encouraged, his apostles. But did they match that with obedience? Precise obedience?

I do believe I said, "It was ALLOWED of the Lord...I did not say that the Lord brought the persecution. Did HE very likely use what the Pharisaical Jews were doing to the church? Probably. But since we were not there, it is a moot point to say that they were not fulfilling what they were asked to do by the Lord. In order to make such an assertion, you would have to be God, and honestly, I don't remember ever talking to you before this.

Then you ask "Did they match that with obedience? Precise obedience?"

Hmmmm

Are you observing "precise obedience?"

[RachelYsrael]

Amo 3:6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?

Amo 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

[Twinky]

I’d urge you to think again about responses on this thread.

Look at the last action of Jesus towards the apostles:

John 13:3 Jesus knew that the Father had put him in complete charge of everything, that he came from God and was on his way back to God. 4 So he got up from the supper table, set aside his robe, and put on an apron. 5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the feet of the disciples, drying them with his apron. 6 When he got to Simon Peter, Peter said, "Master, you wash my feet?" 7 Jesus answered, "You don't understand now what I'm doing, but it will be clear enough to you later." ...

12 After he had finished washing their feet, he took his robe, put it back on, and went back to his place at the table. 13 You address me as 'Teacher' and 'Master,' and rightly so. That is what I am. 14 So if I, the Master and Teacher, washed your feet, you must now wash each other's feet. 15 I've laid down a pattern for you. What I've done, you do. 16 I'm only pointing out the obvious. A servant is not ranked above his master; an employee doesn't give orders to the employer. 17 If you understand what I'm telling you, act like it - and live a blessed life.”

The apostles didn’t understand this business about clean and unclean, no distinction between Jews and Gentiles, and real servanthood.

We see how religious Peter is in Acts 10:

10 Peter got hungry and started thinking about lunch. While lunch was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw the skies open up. Something that looked like a huge blanket lowered by ropes at its four corners settled on the ground. 12 Every kind of animal and reptile and bird you could think of was on it. 13 Then a voice came: "Go to it, Peter - kill and eat." 14 Peter said, "Oh, no, Lord. I've never so much as tasted food that was not kosher." 15 The voice came a second time: "If God says it's okay, it's okay." 16 This happened three times, and then the blanket was pulled back up into the skies. ….

(So in spite of the last example of footwashing by Jesus; and in spite of previous teaching about what goes into the mouth does not defile – Peter still didn’t “get it.” In fact, he's quite indignant that he should be asked to step outside his cultural values.)

28 Peter addressed [the household of Cornelius], "You know, I'm sure that this is highly irregular. Jews just don't do this - visit and relax with people of another race. But God has just shown me that no race is better than any other… [bless his heart - how many times had he been shown this previously??]

34 Peter fairly exploded with his good news: "It's God's own truth, nothing could be plainer: God plays no favorites! 35 It makes no difference who you are or where you're from - if you want God and are ready to do as he says, the door is open. 36 The Message he sent to the children of Israel - that through Jesus Christ everything is being put together again - well, he's doing it everywhere, among everyone.

Acts 11:

17 So I ask you: If God gave the same exact gift to them as to us when we believed in the Master Jesus Christ, how could I object to God?" 18 Hearing it all laid out like that, they quieted down. And then, as it sank in, they started praising God. "It's really happened! God has broken through to the other nations, opened them up to Life!"

(Maybe they are beginning to understand…)

19 Those who had been scattered by the persecution triggered by Stephen's death traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, but they were still only speaking and dealing with their fellow Jews.

20 Then some of the men from Cyprus and Cyrene who had come to Antioch started talking to Greeks, giving them the Message of the Master Jesus. 21 God was pleased with what they were doing and put his stamp of approval on it - quite a number of the Greeks believed and turned to the Master.

Bride of JC says that the persecution was allowed of God: what I see is that it happened, but it still didn’t achieve all that was commanded. This makes it clear there is still no outreach to non-Jews. And the Jewish members of the church are suspicious of those who do reach outside their own culture:

22 When the church in Jerusalem got wind of this, they sent Barnabas to Antioch to check on things. 23 As soon as he arrived, he saw that God was behind and in it all. He threw himself in with them, got behind them, urging them to stay with it the rest of their lives. 24 He was a good man that way, enthusiastic and confident in the Holy Spirit's ways. The community grew large and strong in the Master.

Clearly Barnabas sees how it is supposed to be. He sees there is a lot of difference between what was going on in Jerusalem, and what he was seeing in Antioch. He wouldn’t have stayed otherwise; he would have gone straight back to Jerusalem.

A bit like seeing the scriptures taught today in a “live” church, and comparing that with the scriptures in a church where they go through the motions.

As I have read more and more with this question/idea in mind, it seems to me more and more that what I first posted is correct. We can get so "holier than thou" about everything that people (who are written about in the Bible) did was correct - yeah, right. Lots of their mistakes are written about in there too.

There's a time and a place for setting up centralised teaching places (school of the prophets? The work in Antioch?) but right after Pentecost was not the time (proclaiming the message was more urgent) nor the place (Jerusalem was full of legalists ready to attack).

I think traveling fast and light, as Paul did on his many missionary journeys, was what the LJC intended these apostles to do. Sometimes he is noted as having had companions; no reason to suppose that they didn’t have wives and children too.

The apostles could have left their wives and kids (if necessary) back in Galilee (sufficiently far from Jerusalem), broadcast the News, and then return to Galilee. Or taken the wives and kids (if still young) and gone as a family. Why not? (Family WoW.) There are even now many missionary families moving the word today in many countries. Certainly the apostles’ wives would have seen as much of Jesus as many of the husbands, entertained the LJC in their homes, heard his teachings - consider Mary and Martha. Why shouldn't the wives of the apostles also be able to teach and share the News? They would have outreach in places their menfolk couldn't.

From a PM to me:

It appears that the apostles could well have made the same mistakes that Christian "leaders" have repeated ad nauseum through the centuries since Christ ascended. Every time "leaders" try to "centralize" authority, and then, of necessity, "finances", in order to accommodate "numbers" of converts, followers, disciples, etc, problems of legalism and "works of the flesh" seem to ensue, and multiply as quickly as the "numbers" do. The examples of Jesus' and Paul's constant "mobility" when it came to "moving the word", are to me, far more relevant to what the "will of God" regarding the same is truly about, than are the attempts of the apostles to centralize "the ministry" at Jerusalem!

T-Bone: I agree that every detail worked on Saul’s hard heart too. But it didn’t need to include the death of Stephen. Precious in the sight of the lord is the death of any of his people. God was big enough to work on Saul’s meanness outside of Stephen’s death. The LJC could have appeared to him at some other time.

Rachel: it was the Greeks who were complaining they were neglected, not Hebrews. Not clear whether these were people who normally lived in or close to Jerusalem, or whether they were also visitors from parts round about come for the big Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) and stayed. Or even other visitors, traders and passers-by who came and never left.

None of this, of course, “proves” anything. I’m just offering a different take on a familiar section of scripture and wondering if there aren’t lessons to be learned. We mustn’t consider that everything that we read about in the Bible really is the will of God, no matter how Godly it appears. There’s a shedload of examples of that in both OT and NT.

[brideofjc]

Look at the last action of Jesus towards the apostles:

John 13:3 Jesus knew that the Father had put him in complete charge of everything, that he came from God and was on his way back to God. 4 So he got up from the supper table, set aside his robe, and put on an apron. 5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the feet of the disciples, drying them with his apron. 6 When he got to Simon Peter, Peter said, "Master, you wash my feet?" 7 Jesus answered, "You don't understand now what I'm doing, but it will be clear enough to you later." ...

12 After he had finished washing their feet, he took his robe, put it back on, and went back to his place at the table. 13 You address me as 'Teacher' and 'Master,' and rightly so. That is what I am. 14 So if I, the Master and Teacher, washed your feet, you must now wash each other's feet. 15 I've laid down a pattern for you. What I've done, you do. 16 I'm only pointing out the obvious. A servant is not ranked above his master; an employee doesn't give orders to the employer. 17 If you understand what I'm telling you, act like it - and live a blessed life.”

The apostles didn’t understand this business about clean and unclean, no distinction between Jews and Gentiles, and real servanthood.

I would beg to differ on that issue, Twinky....they were Jews and all of their lives were centered around making distinctions between clean/unclean. This is why it took a while before Peter began to understand the truth that weren't any distinctions between Jew and Gentile before God any more.

19 Those who had been scattered by the persecution triggered by Stephen's death traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, but they were still only speaking and dealing with their fellow Jews.

20 Then some of the men from Cyprus and Cyrene who had come to Antioch started talking to Greeks, giving them the Message of the Master Jesus. 21 God was pleased with what they were doing and put his stamp of approval on it - quite a number of the Greeks believed and turned to the Master.

Bride of JC says that the persecution was allowed of God: what I see is that it happened, So pray tell, what is the difference? but it still didn’t achieve all that was commanded. This makes it clear there is still no outreach to non-Jews. And the Jewish members of the church are suspicious of those who do reach outside their own culture:

As I have read more and more with this question/idea in mind, it seems to me more and more that what I first posted is correct. We can get so "holier than thou" about everything that people (who are written about in the Bible) did was correct - yeah, right. Lots of their mistakes are written about in there too.

Of course they are, that's what makes the bible unlike any other "holy book".

There's a time and a place for setting up centralised teaching places (school of the prophets? The work in Antioch?) but right after Pentecost was not the time (proclaiming the message was more urgent) nor the place (Jerusalem was full of legalists ready to attack).

You're still talking many years, perhaps three to five. So what were they doing initially? Carrying out the mission of the Lord Jesus. It takes time to wait upon the Lord for His movements, not ours. If they were a little slow to get going, the Lord's grace covered and He gently led them to where HE wanted them to be.

Rachel: it was the Greeks who were complaining they were neglected, not Hebrews. Not clear whether these were people who normally lived in or close to Jerusalem, or whether they were also visitors from parts round about come for the big Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) and stayed. Or even other visitors, traders and passers-by who came and never left.

When the Jews were sent out in exile or the Diaspora, over numerous years, their children/grandchildren also began to be Hellenized, as well as retaining their Jewish heritage. When we read the Grecians, it is not referring to actual Greek people from Greece, but rather those Jews that had been born outside of Judea and so they were referred to as Grecians.

None of this, of course, “proves” anything. I’m just offering a different take on a familiar section of scripture and wondering if there aren’t lessons to be learned. We mustn’t consider that everything that we read about in the Bible really is the will of God, no matter how Godly it appears. There’s a shedload of examples of that in both OT and NT.

Of course, there are always lessons to be learned. This is why the WORD of GOD is always alive and real, a fountain of living waters.

[RachelYsrael]

To twinky...

The translation you are attempting to quote from is so far removed from Holy Scripture as to be laughable. I wake up each morning looking for what joke you will tell next - but it's not you, it's just that counterfeit book you seem to hold so dear. I will print this thread out, then go over it with my trusty KJV and try to decipher what the heck you are trying to say here.

There is one comment you made that was greatly offensive by the way - the snippet about Peter and the vision he had...It was a bit garbled so I will have to read a bit slower when I stop giggling. I know you mean well, but I present this response in the spirit of your responses to my Sista BJC.

So, I will get back to you.

And I love a good row once in a while to keep me on my toes, so as soon as I decipher it all, we'll get to it.

Oh - as to this snippet here, I know from your response to me you either didn't read what I said, or you don't understand English to well. Or it could be that thing you read someone called a Bible.

Rachel: it was the Greeks who were complaining they were neglected, not Hebrews. Not clear whether these were people who normally lived in or close to Jerusalem, or whether they were also visitors from parts round about come for the big Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) and stayed. Or even other visitors, traders and passers-by who came and never left.

I will explain your errors in this statement in a bit, I promise.

RachelYsrael

[RachelYsrael]

Here’s a verse which always seemed a little “off” to me (all quotes from The Message, which I read occasionally for its freshness and vitality).

Acts 6

1 During this time, as the disciples were increasing in numbers by leaps and bounds, hard feelings developed among the Greek-speaking believers - "Hellenists" - toward the Hebrew-speaking believers because their widows were being discriminated against in the daily food lines. 2 So the Twelve called a meeting of the disciples. They said, "It wouldn't be right for us to abandon our responsibilities for preaching and teaching the Word of God to help with the care of the poor. 3 So, friends, choose seven men from among you whom everyone trusts, men full of the Holy Spirit and good sense, and we'll assign them this task. 4 Meanwhile, we'll stick to our assigned tasks of prayer and speaking God's Word."

These first 2 verses do not say the Greeks were "poor Greek-speaking believers - it says the Greeks murmured against the Hebrews because their (Greek) widows were being neglected in the "daily ministration". Verese 2 tells us that this is referring to meals. As I said previously, Jerusalem had been occupied by Rome, and there was a strong Greek presence as well. To learn more about that, please refer back to Kings and Daniel, they tell the history very well.

We know that Gentiles did not become part of the Christian sect of Israel until Acts 10, when Cornelius and his household believed, and they were Romans, by the way. So there is the first error with your enlightening little book.

Last night this verse suddenly pinged into new vision (as it were). I have never seen or heard anything taught like this so offer it for considered opinion. I could be completely off the wall.

You may very well be, and completely.

So right from the beginning, the apostles didn’t want to get involved with the poor. Excuse me, hadn’t they spent enough time with Jesus, walking the streets, talking to all and sundry?

Excuse me - Jesus told them to go not in the way of the Gentiles. That is what they heard. Jesus said I come to the lost sheep of the HOUSE OF ISRAEL. They were doing what He told them. They had no problem with the poor. Israel was and is still poor. Remember how Paul tells the Philippians about the poor saints in Jerusalem? (Another story for another time) So, they did indeed talk to to all and sundry Israelites. No Doubt.

(Doesn’t this sound a bit like the Pope refusing to leave the Vatican, other church leaders preferring to stay in their palaces, houses and comfort places; even wannabe ministry leaders living in log cabins? But I don’t want to derail my own thread here!)

Too late, Luther. I mean Twinky. (And this is just your opening statement!)

Here is the actual commission, the last words of the Lord Jesus Christ to them:

Acts 1

4 As they met and ate meals together, he told them that they were on no account to leave Jerusalem but "must wait for what the Father promised: the promise you heard from me. 5 John baptized in water; you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. And soon."

6 When they were together for the last time they asked, "Master, are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel now?

Is this the time?" 7 He told them, "You don't get to know the time. Timing is the Father's business. 8 What you'll get is the Holy Spirit. And when the Holy Spirit comes on you, you will be able to be my witnesses in Jerusalem, all over Judea and Samaria, even to the ends of the world." 9 These were his last words.

I have read the above statement here a few times, and quite frankly, or Shirley if you are a girl, I don't know where are what you are talking about. But I do know that those apostles knew where the Judean Kingdom was, but the Kingdom of Israel - the 10 tribes were missing. They were asking Him was He going to return those 10 tribes back to the land and restore their kingdom. That is what Jesus was referring to when He said it is not for you to know the times or the seasons - If you read Isaiah 12 and 13 you see all the tribes returning. But we still don't know when this will be. It has not happened yet. I think this may be why He told them to go to the ends of the earth - Deuteronomy 28 says Israel would be scattered to the 4 ends of the earth. Hmm, food for thought there.

So. They're told to wait for a few days – get the gift of holy spirit – then they are to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and elsewhere. They weren’t told to wait around afterwards. Weren’t told to stay in Jerusalem. Were told to “get out there.”

So why do we find them quite a long time later – still in Jerusalem?

You have to refer back to the prophecy on Israel by that Moses gave, that they would be scattered to the 4 corners of the earth - As you read on in Acts, and history as well, they were scattered by the Romans after the fall in 70AD. I think maybe Jesus' words in Acts 1:8 were prophecy, the same prophecy Moses spoke concerning Israel in Deuteronomy.

Deu 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

Deu 28:65 And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind:

More later, but hopefully if you consider what I have written, you may see things in different light. I promise I will get back to this tomorrow.

Rachel

[Twinky]

Of course you are both soooo right, Bride and Rachel.

Rachel, you do not need to be insulting. This is not About the Way - it's Doctrinal, and if you prefer "a good row" you can stay in About The Way.

I must have over a dozen different versions of the Bible at home. I have read KJV so very long that it is too familiar. I read The Message occasionally because it gives suuuuch a different picture BUT if you go back and read it in KJV or a more tight translation you see what it is getting at. I chose to use The Message not because it is good but because it breaks out of the KJV/TWI mold - sometimes it's so eyebrow-raising that it makes me take another look at KJV or anything else. It's not my Bible of choice.

My invitation is to think outside the box for a while. But if you prefer not to, that's fine.

[RachelYsrael]

Of course you are both soooo right, Bride and Rachel.

Rachel, you do not need to be insulting.

Like I said before, Twinky - I was responding in the tone YOU set with BJC. Does "Don't argue with me" sound familiar?

This is not About the Way - it's Doctrinal, and if you prefer "a good row" you can stay in About The Way.

I don't recall saying or implying anything "about the way" - I am light years removed from that, it seems like a dream. The doctrine and the attitude. And in case you haven't noticed, the Doctrinal Thread is full of good healthy debates - rows about doctrinal issues in the Bible. Maybe you could browse some past threads to catch up. And, I generally don't visit the about the way forum, so I can't stay there.

I must have over a dozen different versions of the Bible at home. I have read KJV so very long that it is too familiar. I read The Message occasionally because it gives suuuuch a different picture BUT if you go back and read it in KJV or a more tight translation you see what it is getting at. I chose to use The Message not because it is good but because it breaks out of the KJV/TWI mold - sometimes it's so eyebrow-raising that it makes me take another look at KJV or anything else. It's not my Bible of choice.

Your choice. The message is garbage. In My Humble Opinion. A waste of time. I was trying to illustrate in just the opening verses of your original thread how far removed your book is from what the traditional translations teach as to be laughable. When you start defending what you are saying with such garbage, then I have to respond. If it's not your bible of choice, and so obviously chock-full of holes and outright lies that in no way resembe scripture, why use it?

My invitation is to think outside the box for a while. But if you prefer not to, that's fine.

I have no problem with thinking outside the box. If you would care to read some of my posts you will see that. Just try to stay within the Scriptures while thinking outside the traditional box that is mainstream so-called christian doctrine. I mean no offense. I responded to you in kind. If you can't take it, don't do it to others.

RachelYsrael

[cman]

Just try to stay within the Scriptures

That is a box Rachel. No matter what version or translation.

If someone can get something good out of any version or translation.

Then what's the problem.

The standard of Truth is within the individual,

where the Word is and dwells and has life in itself.

I could list scriptures from any version or any translation.

As well as scriptures of many religions.

There are quite a few.

Scripture is still being written today.

[Twinky]

Rachel: by all means re-post what I have posted using the same scriptures from KJV if that is what you prefer.

I invite you to consider the content (+heart) not the precise words.

You seem determined to pick a fight. I am not fighting, arguing or anything else. Just ... asking. Kindly reply politely or not at all. Ex-Wayfers have seen too much abuse. Let's not add to it. If I offended you by what I posted in response ot someone else (as you say), I'm sorry. Perhaps that person can respond if offended - or are you the same person?

I welcome considered comments. Plese keep this thread civil :-)

[RachelYsrael]

Rachel: by all means re-post what I have posted using the same scriptures from KJV if that is what you prefer.

I invite you to consider the content (+heart) not the precise words.

I assure you Twink that I am considering content and heart of this thread.

You seem determined to pick a fight.

I am not PICKING a fight Twinky. I thought one was already going on. But if I am wrong, please forgive me. I love discussing, contending and disputing the scriptures. I will be as polite as you...:)

I am not fighting, arguing or anything else. Just ... asking. Kindly reply politely or not at all. Ex-Wayfers have seen too much abuse. Let's not add to it. If I offended you by what I posted in response ot someone else (as you say), I'm sorry. Perhaps that person can respond if offended - or are you the same person?

No, I am not the same person - but I was under the impression that this thread was a free-for-all - I just jumped in. Again, forgive me (I have 70 x 7 - 2 to go )

I welcome considered comments. Plese keep this thread civil :-)

I will be as civil as you.

So, what did you think about my response to the verses you posted in your opening thread?

Rachel

[brideofjc]

That is a box Rachel. No matter what version or translation.

But CMAN, this is supposed to be the Doctrinal thread....i.e. Christian doctrine.

If someone can get something good out of any version or translation.

Then what's the problem.

The standard of Truth is within the individual,

where the Word is and dwells and has life in itself.

The Standard of Truth is Jesus....without HIM, we are all just a bunch of mukkety yuks.

I could list scriptures from any version or any translation.

As well as scriptures of many religions.

There are quite a few.

Scripture is still being written today.

Rachel: by all means re-post what I have posted using the same scriptures from KJV if that is what you prefer.

I invite you to consider the content (+heart) not the precise words.

You seem determined to pick a fight. I am not fighting, arguing or anything else. Just ... asking. Kindly reply politely or not at all. Ex-Wayfers have seen too much abuse. Let's not add to it. If I offended you by what I posted in response ot someone else (as you say), I'm sorry. Perhaps that person can respond if offended - or are you the same person?

I welcome considered comments. Plese keep this thread civil :-)

No, Rachel is a completely different person, Twinky. I wasn't really offended, just rather amused that

you put it that way....but now that I come to think about it...hmmmm....maybe you were thumping me

on the head....another poster once did that to me.....

[cman]

No Brideof, it says Doctrinal.

Not Christian Doctrinal.

And isn't 'Jesus' the Word in the Flesh?

What made that possible?

According to Jesus' words, 'in you' is the whole point.

It isn't 'Scripture in you' but Christ.

Without that, there is no scripture.

Edited March 20, 2008 by cman

[brideofjc]

No Brideof, it says Doctrinal.

Not Christian Doctrinal.

And isn't 'Jesus' the Word in the Flesh?

What made that possible?

According to Jesus' words, 'in you' is the whole point.

It isn't 'Scripture in you' but Christ.

Without that, there is no scripture.

The Living Word pre-existed you or moi (.) period

[Bramble]

Non Christians once posted here more frequently than lately--pagans, Jews, athiests, agnostics etc, and Bible scripture or Christian beliefs has never been a requirement to posting. Pawtucket has made it clear this is an x way forum, not a Christian forum, though mostposters here are Christian.

At one time there were posters who were horribly offended by non Christian posters--or even not-like-them Christians posting, it has become more civil here. Most of the nonChristians have been posting less frequently, so it would be easy to think this is a Christian only forum.

[cman]

Yeah, funny kindof, Bramble.

Jesus was a Jew.

I believe he was also trained in many more arts of thinking.

[brideofjc]

Acts 6

1 During this time, as the disciples were increasing in numbers by leaps and bounds, hard feelings developed among the Greek-speaking believers - "Hellenists" - toward the Hebrew-speaking believers because their widows were being discriminated against in the daily food lines. 2 So the Twelve called a meeting of the disciples. They said, "It wouldn't be right for us to abandon our responsibilities for preaching and teaching the Word of God to help with the care of the poor. 3 So, friends, choose seven men from among you whom everyone trusts, men full of the Holy Spirit and good sense, and we'll assign them this task. 4 Meanwhile, we'll stick to our assigned tasks of prayer and speaking God's Word."

These first 2 verses do not say the Greeks were "poor Greek-speaking believers - it says the Greeks murmured against the Hebrews because their (Greek) widows were being neglected in the "daily ministration". Verese 2 tells us that this is referring to meals. As I said previously, Jerusalem had been occupied by Rome, and there was a strong Greek presence as well. To learn more about that, please refer back to Kings and Daniel, they tell the history very well.

We know that Gentiles did not become part of the Christian sect of Israel until Acts 10, when Cornelius and his household believed, and they were Romans, by the way. So there is the first error with your enlightening little book.

Quite the contrary, Rachel. The Grecians were Jewish people that had been displaced during the diaspora or the Exile. The NASB concurs and so does the Companion bible by Bullinger. These people were not Gentiles, but rather Jews. At this time, the church was still very much ethnocentric and was not reaching out to the Gentiles.

Acts 1

4 As they met and ate meals together, he told them that they were on no account to leave Jerusalem but "must wait for what the Father promised: the promise you heard from me. 5 John baptized in water; you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. And soon."

6 When they were together for the last time they asked, "Master, are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel now?

Is this the time?" 7 He told them, "You don't get to know the time. Timing is the Father's business. 8 What you'll get is the Holy Spirit. And when the Holy Spirit comes on you, you will be able to be my witnesses in Jerusalem, all over Judea and Samaria, even to the ends of the world." 9 These were his last words.

I have read the above statement here a few times, and quite frankly, or Shirley if you are a girl, I don't know where are what you are talking about. But I do know that those apostles knew where the Judean Kingdom was, but the Kingdom of Israel - the 10 tribes were missing. They were asking Him was He going to return those 10 tribes back to the land and restore their kingdom. That is what Jesus was referring to when He said it is not for you to know the times or the seasons - If you read Isaiah 12 and 13 you see all the tribes returning. But we still don't know when this will be. It has not happened yet. I think this may be why He told them to go to the ends of the earth - Deuteronomy 28 says Israel would be scattered to the 4 ends of the earth. Hmm, food for thought there.

So. They're told to wait for a few days – get the gift of holy spirit – then they are to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and elsewhere. They weren’t told to wait around afterwards. Weren’t told to stay in Jerusalem. Were told to “get out there.”

So why do we find them quite a long time later – still in Jerusalem?

You have to refer back to the prophecy on Israel by that Moses gave, that they would be scattered to the 4 corners of the earth - As you read on in Acts, and history as well, they were scattered by the Romans after the fall in 70AD. I think maybe Jesus' words in Acts 1:8 were prophecy, the same prophecy Moses spoke concerning Israel in Deuteronomy.

Deu 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

Deu 28:65 And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind:

The prophetic utterances you mention, Rachel, do not apply. Those were curses that Moses uttered if they would not obey the commands of God, which happened and so God had them taken out in the first exile. They are not a prophecy that the Lord Jesus would one day send his disciples out from Jerusalem to convert the world.

I would also recommend that you study outside the KJV as well. The KJV does have its share of transcribed errors and some of them change the very meaning of what was written in the Greek. I still use the KJV, because that is what I am most familiar with, but I frequently use the Ryrie NASB study bible. I also have a copy of The Message by Eugene Peterson and I think it is and was an inspired translation into modern English. Personally, I think Peterson did a phenomenal job.

[RachelYsrael]

I really have to disagree, BJC about the Greeks being Israelites. My reasoning is based on common sense, not commentary. In Acts 2 we see the believers had all things common, breaking bread from house to house, Levites repenting and selling their property (Under the Law they are not allowed to own anything, remember) So, when the Levite sold his land, he was keeping the Levitical Law that pertained to him.

No I ask you something. I f all this was going on, why would a group of Israelite believers all of a sudden start complaining and taking issue that they were being neglected? Why would it specifically say Greeks and not believers if what you say is so? Why would they be singled out, if Acts 2 is true and the believers had all things common?

I am sure these people were Gentiles, and not Christian. The believers were slacking on their civil duties to the rulers of the city - Greeks and Romans. I am also sure that the Israelite sect of Christians were eating very well, and they continued to share all with each other.

Rachel