Friendly Bible Study - participants must agree to Nicene Creed.

[ScottA]

Acts 1

The words are to "O Theophilus" meaning "friend of God." Which is to say, to one who was then in the local context friendly to God. But now being part and parcel as the eternal word from God, the greater context is also to include all who are friends of God. In other words the book of Acts was not to enemies "already at work" within the church, but specifically to those who are friends of God (1 John 4:3, 2 Peter 2:1, 2 Thessalonians 2:7).

Remembering that there are two different contexts for what follows, one local of that time, but also for all included until the end of time: then came the confirmation that Christ gave of His sending the Holy Spirit, soon to come.

The narrative then goes immediately to the transition point between flesh and spirit, showing Jesus becoming "firstfruits" of those born [again] of the spirit of God. When Jesus came saying, "Follow Me"--this is where He was going--and this is where all who would be born again of the spirit of God are to be lined up and following. The indication of this is made known by Jesus being taken up and a "cloud" receiving Him. Another indication is the enactment and mention of "forty days." Forty days is a reference to the forty years Israel wandered in the desert before entering into the promised land. Which Israel had done in the world and in the flesh, which pointed to that moment of Jesus entering into heaven (being the spiritual realm and rest of God). The "cloud" signified this just as it did in the desert, by day. These things were made manifest here again by God to show what is otherwise unseen according to Jesus' explanation of "everyone who is born of the spirit", meaning: invisible (John 3:8). The distinction here that is most commonly made in error, is that because these things were made manifest and visible for a witness, is that He entered or inherited the kingdom in the flesh, against what Jesus had previously explained. In other words, you can't have it both ways, and no, Jesus did not contradict Himself. As the greatest act of spiritual transition unto God as firstfruits--not the firstfruits of flesh but of the spirit--He could have just made it all only visible in the spirit and otherwise invisible to men of flesh and blood. But then there would have been no clear direction as to all that was intended and included in "Follow Me." This was the "like manner" by which Jesus would return, referred to by the two men standing by in white apparel. All of which was to be included in the witness given unto the ends of the earth.

The explanation then given by Peter regarding Judas was in reference to Satan, who just as Jesus was cut off in the middle of the times of this world, was also cut off...in the middle (Acts 1:18). Just as Jesus would then go to the Father and come forth in spirit to those who would answer His knocking at the door (Revelation 3:20), as the fulfilment of God pouring out His spirit upon all flesh as foretold by Joel (Joel 2:28), announced by Jesus, and confirmed by Peter--Satan too was poured out. Thus, these times of the gentiles where the Holy Spirit and the spirit of antiChrist coexist as wheat among tares.

Interestingly, Peter quotes part of Psalm 69 that seems to fit the context of those current, local times. Except for our times and that of the greater context of the times of the gentiles, one ought to look at the details of the Psalm. Peter gave a double entendre, again, having two different contexts. "Let his dwelling place be desolate, and let no one live in it" as opposed to: "Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents" (Psalm 69:25). Meaning--for the greater context--let none assume to dwell in their flesh. ... Does that mean Peter misquoted or broke context? No, on the contrary, he executed the context to the full on all accounts.

Both contexts, of their times and of ours, was then given by God in the replacement of Judas (of Satan) with Matthias (meaning "gift of God"). Which is to say, God replaced Satan...with the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Acts 1

The words are to "O Theophilus" meaning "friend of God." Which is to say, to one who was then in the local context friendly to God. But now being part and parcel as the eternal word from God, the greater context is also to include all who are friends of God. In other words the book of Acts was not to enemies "already at work" within the church, but specifically to those who are friends of God (1 John 4:3, 2 Peter 2:1, 2 Thessalonians 2:7).

Remembering that there are two different contexts for what follows, one local of that time, but also for all included until the end of time: then came the confirmation that Christ gave of His sending the Holy Spirit, soon to come.

The narrative then goes immediately to the transition point between flesh and spirit, showing Jesus becoming "firstfruits" of those born [again] of the spirit of God. When Jesus came saying, "Follow Me"--this is where He was going--and this is where all who would be born again of the spirit of God are to be lined up and following. The indication of this is made known by Jesus being taken up and a "cloud" receiving Him. Another indication is the enactment and mention of "forty days." Forty days is a reference to the forty years Israel wandered in the desert before entering into the promised land. Which Israel had done in the world and in the flesh, which pointed to that moment of Jesus entering into heaven (being the spiritual realm and rest of God). The "cloud" signified this just as it did in the desert, by day. These things were made manifest here again by God to show what is otherwise unseen according to Jesus' explanation of "everyone who is born of the spirit", meaning: invisible (John 3:8). The distinction here that is most commonly made in error, is that because these things were made manifest and visible for a witness, is that He entered or inherited the kingdom in the flesh, against what Jesus had previously explained. In other words, you can't have it both ways, and no, Jesus did not contradict Himself. As the greatest act of spiritual transition unto God as firstfruits--not the firstfruits of flesh but of the spirit--He could have just made it all only visible in the spirit and otherwise invisible to men of flesh and blood. But then there would have been no clear direction as to all that was intended and included in "Follow Me." This was the "like manner" by which Jesus would return, referred to by the two men standing by in white apparel. All of which was to be included in the witness given unto the ends of the earth.

The explanation then given by Peter regarding Judas was in reference to Satan, who just as Jesus was cut off in the middle of the times of this world, was also cut off...in the middle (Acts 1:18). Just as Jesus would then go to the Father and come forth in spirit to those who would answer His knocking at the door (Revelation 3:20), as the fulfilment of God pouring out His spirit upon all flesh as foretold by Joel (Joel 2:28), announced by Jesus, and confirmed by Peter--Satan too was poured out. Thus, these times of the gentiles where the Holy Spirit and the spirit of antiChrist coexist as wheat among tares.

Interestingly, Peter quotes part of Psalm 69 that seems to fit the context of those current, local times. Except for our times and that of the greater context of the times of the gentiles, one ought to look at the details of the Psalm. Peter gave a double entendre, again, having two different contexts. "Let his dwelling place be desolate, and let no one live in it" as opposed to: "Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents" (Psalm 69:25). Meaning--for the greater context--let none assume to dwell in their flesh. ... Does that mean Peter misquoted or broke context? No, on the contrary, he executed the context to the full on all accounts.

Both contexts, of their times and of ours, was then given by God in the replacement of Judas (of Satan) with Matthias (meaning "gift of God"). Which is to say, God replaced Satan...with the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Nice thesis - thanks for your effort.

Now many folks in this study are just needing to read the text prayerfully, and pondering on what He might be saying.

It might be better to bring your good and interesting offering a little later in the piece when folks have had a chance to ponder for themselves.

The general culture of this study group is to seek the participation of all so the 'least' can be heard. We are also attempting to glean personal transformation by the Living Word of the Spirit as we study.

But hey, I particularly appreciated your explaining the audience being the friends of God - that's us :)

 

[Rita]

I still think it’s a shame that others are not really contributing to this study. It reminds me of the many mid week groups where most people stayed silent.
Well this is what Acts 1 relays to me as I have reflected on it this morning.
It makes me aware, as in the gospels, that Jesus spoke more than is recorded in the 40 days after his resurrection. It was a time of learning for them, more so in light of what they had witnessed with his resurrection.
The 40days took me back to Jesus’s time in the wilderness after he had gone through the waters at his baptism. This period of time was about preparation of the coming battle ( temptation through Satan using the same kinds of lies as he told Eve )

There is already evidence of the apostles changing, no longer running away and Peter is definitely more confident and being led by the word.
There is still evidence though of them thinking in human terms with regards to the restoration of Israel - I don’t know that kind of made me think about how so many still do that ( just something that I felt when I was reflecting on this chapter )
There is still this mixture of worldly verse spiritual thoughts , they were “ a sabbaths day walk away ‘ ( the law ) they cast lots ( cultural )
The cloud ‘ hid him from their sight ‘ ( he hadn’t gone , just couldn’t be seen )
The new kingdom was a spiritual one, in a different realm.
The whole thing about them looking up into heaven just reminds me of the impression we often have of God being in this far off place above us - that has kind of grown over the years within the church and culture - we look up - the angles told them not to do that ! ( have no idea if that is even relevant ! )

 

[Carl Emerson]

I still think it’s a shame that others are not really contributing to this study. It reminds me of the many mid week groups where most people stayed silent.
Well this is what Acts 1 relays to me as I have reflected on it this morning.
It makes me aware, as in the gospels, that Jesus spoke more than is recorded in the 40 days after his resurrection. It was a time of learning for them, more so in light of what they had witnessed with his resurrection.
The 40days took me back to Jesus’s time in the wilderness after he had gone through the waters at his baptism. This period of time was about preparation of the coming battle ( temptation through Satan using the same kinds of lies as he told Eve )

There is already evidence of the apostles changing, no longer running away and Peter is definitely more confident and being led by the word.
There is still evidence though of them thinking in human terms with regards to the restoration of Israel - I don’t know that kind of made me think about how so many still do that ( just something that I felt when I was reflecting on this chapter )
There is still this mixture of worldly verse spiritual thoughts , they were “ a sabbaths day walk away ‘ ( the law ) they cast lots ( cultural )
The cloud ‘ hid him from their sight ‘ ( he hadn’t gone , just couldn’t be seen )
The new kingdom was a spiritual one, in a different realm.
The whole thing about them looking up into heaven just reminds me of the impression we often have of God being in this far off place above us - that has kind of grown over the years within the church and culture - we look up - the angles told them not to do that ! ( have no idea if that is even relevant ! )

Thanks Rita for your thoughts.

It is interesting that Jesus didn't disagree with their question about the Kingdom being restored to Israel - He just said that it was not for them to know when. Some think it is happening now but his doesn't sit well with me unless there is a massive revival among the Jews.
However I have no calling to study or teach end times, I tend to think this can be a distraction that takes our eye of what we are called to do today.

Yes the choosing of Mathias by lots is interesting, particularly in light of...
Proverbs 16:33
The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the Lord.

Yet as the Church grew there is a growing ability to hear what the Spirit is saying to the gathered. I don't think lots get another mention.

40 Days is certainly associated with preparation. It so happens that I was shown I would need to wait 40 years before moving into my appointed ministry.

Looking into heaven... event is more appreciated when we read Daniel 7:13... and see what happened from Heavens perspective. (one of my favourite passages.)

Hey thanks again for your input - I hope others follow suit.

 

[Rita]

Just for reference that was in fact the last time lots were cast , when Stephen was chosen it says nothing about casting lots.

Also my reference to restoration of Israel was not really about end times, it was more to do with the focus being on earthly victory and restoration rather than on Spiritual restoration and victory. They were still under the impression that Jesus was going to do certain things culturally to bring about a release from Roman rule. They were not focussing on the spiritual victory that Jesus had come to achieve in people lives.

 

[Carl Emerson]

We will wait a few days for others to join in and comment.

@Rita just wondering if you had time to view the video on the revival in Mexico I posted for background 'reading'

 

[Rita]

We will wait a few days for others to join in and comment.

@Rita just wondering if you had time to view the video on the revival in Mexico I posted for background 'reading'

I have just checked as I forgot about the video, but the link you sent goes on to Wikipedia and info about George Müller

 

[Carl Emerson]

I have just checked as I forgot about the video, but the link you sent goes on to Wikipedia and info about George Müller

The link is on post #389 :)

 

[Carl Emerson]

@ScottA Just to say we have a common interest and respect for Mr. Einstein...

 

[Carl Emerson]

@ScottA Just to say we have a common interest and respect for Mr. Einstein...

Have you read the biography by Dennis Brian ???

 

[ScottA]

Have you read the biography by Dennis Brian ???

No, have not. It's good then?

 

[Carl Emerson]

No, have not. It's good then?

Yes - Title - "Einstein a Life"

 

[Azim]

I'm currently going through Acts myself with the young adults bible study I lead. Some things that stood out.

Verse 11: "“Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

Made me think of Revelation 19:11: “Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.”

In verse 15, Peter takes lead finally among the apostles and disciples. As we go further into Acts, Peter begins to quote a lot of the Old Testament. I noticed this connects back with Luke's gospel, verse 24:44-45: "
44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” 45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures."

As for using lots to decide who would take Judas' place among the apostles, I originally thought this was them gambling, which is something we aren't suppose to do. Looking into it, I found God allowed the use of casting lots in the OT, and even instructed the Israelites to do so at times. For example, in the book of Numbers, God had His people cast lots to divide the land between the 12 tribes. In Chronicles, lots were used to divide duties between the priests.

As I'm currently further in to Acts, one thing I'm finding interesting is the similiar experiences the believers encounter, which Jesus did during his ministry. There are interesting parallels for sure.

 

[Carl Emerson]

"Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures."

Shucks - we could do with a bit of that on the forum.

And a further proof that the Scripture without Him granting understanding is a closed book that can't be opened by the natural mind.

 

[Carl Emerson]

OK ready for the next session ???

Home work - read Acts chapter 2.

I will kick it off early next week - it should be a good one...

May the Lord inspire us as we consider his precious Scripture.

 

[Rita]

Thanks Carl,
I am on holiday in Spain at the moment. Will read while I am relaxing by the pool at the beautiful villa, I came with my eldest son and his family - so nice to have constant sunshine and lovely weather.

 

[Oneoff]

I've just discovered this nice friendly little thread.
For my part (at 89) "I've been everywhere man" and been a lot of things.
I've never had a 'road to Damascus experience' but feel sure that I have never not believed in God in a very real way.
Nevertheless I have to confess that I first got into 'evangelical fundamentalism' at around 12-13 years of age simply by joining the little suburban Chapel opposite our house, for the purpose of getting closer to Jean, who had been my childhood sweetheart since the age of 10.
I joined the chapel's young men's group and everything grew from that.
We had such a thriving 'young people's group' that we completely filled two rows of 'pews' at adult services, morning and evenings every Sunday, every Tuesday evening for prayer, every Thursday for Bible Study, and every Saturday evening at the Young People's Fellowship held at the much larger City Chapel from which ours had sprung.
Otherwise we always did everything together, including holidays at Christin guest houses and camp fellowship.
Those were the most fantastic years of my life, culminating in my marriage to Jean at the age of 23.
A few years later everything changed when our Chapel suddenly imploded in fierce three party controversy over who should succeed its aging Pastor.
I found myself unable to take sides and became so disillusioned that I withdrew completely and threw myself into a long study of how Christianity began and developed through to ages up to the time of my beloved Chapels implosion.
Everything that I now am derives from my ever developing convictions, based on complete rejection of preconception and the search for real 'truth' which I became more and more convinced lays within an unbiased study of Matthew chapter 13.
That is what led to my username choice of 'Oneoff' which I first adopted a little over a decade ago.
Rita and Amadeus have known me throughout many forums.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I've just discovered this nice friendly little thread.
For my part (at 89) "I've been everywhere man" and been a lot of things.
I've never had a 'road to Damascus experience' but feel sure that I have never not believed in God in a very real way.
Nevertheless I have to confess that I first got into 'evangelical fundamentalism' at around 12-13 years of age simply by joining the little suburban Chapel opposite our house, for the purpose of getting closer to Jean, who had been my childhood sweetheart since the age of 10.
I joined the chapel's young men's group and everything grew from that.
We had such a thriving 'young people's group' that we completely filled two rows of 'pews' at adult services, morning and evenings every Sunday, every Tuesday evening for prayer, every Thursday for Bible Study, and every Saturday evening at the Young People's Fellowship held at the much larger City Chapel from which ours had sprung.
Otherwise we always did everything together, including holidays at Christin guest houses and camp fellowship.
Those were the most fantastic years of my life, culminating in my marriage to Jean at the age of 23.
A few years later everything changed when our Chapel suddenly imploded in fierce three party controversy over who should succeed its aging Pastor.
I found myself unable to take sides and became so disillusioned that I withdrew completely and threw myself into a long study of how Christianity began and developed through to ages up to the time of my beloved Chapels implosion.
Everything that I now am derives from my ever developing convictions, based on complete rejection of preconception and the search for real 'truth' which I became more and more convinced lays within an unbiased study of Matthew chapter 13.
That is what led to my username choice of 'Oneoff' which I first adopted a little over a decade ago.
Rita and Amadeus have known me throughout many forums.

Welcome...

Thanks for your story...

Just two simple rules - Agree with the Apostles Creed and refrain from discussing the Trinity.

Great that you already have friends here.

This is a Friendly Bible Study and we learn together.

 

[Oneoff]

Welcome...

Thanks for your story...

Just two simple rules - Agree with the Apostles Creed and refrain from discussing the Trinity.

Great that you already have friends here.

This is a Friendly Bible Study and we learn together.

Thanks Carl

 

[Hillsage]

I'll share some of my testimony today to meet the protocol for maybe sharing after the new chapter starts.

I'm from the 'high plains' of western Kansas where they say there's a pretty girl behind every tree. I always like to say it took me 22 years to find....a tree....and I married her. But, that another whole God testimony too. Short story is; We were married in November of 1972.

I was born in 1949 and raised a Roman Catholic. I got my girlfriend pregnant at 19 in 1968. 4 months later I divorced her. I was told that "The church's" stance was, if I got a divorce, I couldn't take communion or get remarried again, unless my first wife died....but be sure to keep coming and giving the church my money.....until the day I died. That simply made me feel like I had committed some kind of unpardonable sin and was headed to hell anyway. That made me mad enough to give God 'a finger' (guess). I then swore to Him that if I was going to go to Hell, then I was going to make sure I had a front row seat. And for the next 4 years I say I committed just about every sin but killing a human or bestiality. I got born again during the Jesus Revolution in the summer of '72'.

THE CALL
The night I actually got born again was in 1972. I was selling drugs, drawing unemployment and working one night a week in a bar for cash (to not lose my unemployment $). A girl had come in to the bar earlier that week and invited me to come to her house to; "Hear some Jesus freak (from a town 30 miles away) come and lay a rap on us." The Jesus movement was getting big then and actually had caught my interest because it wasn't 'traditional' and was considered a bit 'rebellious' to 'the church', which fit my shoulder length curls just perfectly. I went to her house 'that night' and knocked on the door. She answered and said my name. I responded; “Well, you invited me!” Which was true, she had, but she never figured I'd show up. Did I mention I had a bit of a 'reputation'? Anyway, she welcomed me in, turned and bumped into a guy. She said; “Oh, Jack...Hey Jack, this is D, D this is Jack, he's the one speaking tonight.” Jack stuck his hand out and said “Hi D, I'm glad to meet you.” I reached back, and when our hands touched I physically felt something thump me on the chest/heart. It shocked me and my alert button was ringing “What the he_ _ck!!!”

SALVATION
He shared his whole testimony that night....period. No altar call etc. I left, got into my 57 Chevy, held the steering wheel a bit, dropped my head and said; “God 'I know you exist', and I can 'know you', and not just 'know about you'. Help me quit smoking cigarettes.” I was born again, and a very carnal Christian. But my life changed that night. For one week I never even had a
desire to smoke a cigarette and I was joyously and excitedly witnessing 'that fact', as well as Jesus, openly to all. Needless to say, I never had to get rid of my bad company friends, which was all I had. They all thought I'd overdosed on Jesus and disappeared. I was alone and never knew what to do next. I knew that what I received that night, through a guy from another town, I'd never received in 19 years of being in the “One, true, holy, Catholic and apostolic church whose roots went all the way back to Peter.” I also figured that if 'THE church' was wrong,how could any of these Johnny come lately churches be right either? So I decided that all the Jesus freaks I was seeing those days, were 'all carrying bibles around'. That was something I'd never even had. So I went shopping and found a paperback copy of the NT. It was in the 'milk toast' Good News for Modern Man translation. Surveying it, I decided it was a pretty fat book to read to I decided to just skip to the last chapter to see how it ended. IOW the first 'book' I ever read was the book of the Revelation. Freaked me out!!! I remember thinking; “GOD is getting ready to dump on this world and I ain't ready!!! I am ready today for the upper-taker or the undertaker whichever comes first for I know I am saved in spirit, am working out the salvation of my soul and await with all for the glorified body that awaits me on the other side of glory.