Jonah in Acts 18

It's always enlightening reading the Bible in different languages. 

Last night at a German-language Bible study group we were going through Acts 18, and I read something I'd never noticed in English or Greek, which is that God says to Paul (who'd been having an awful time in Corinth), "ich habe ein großes Volk in dieser Stadt." - "I have a large people in this city."

English translations go with "many" because it works better, but the word groß (big) fits πολὺς (many) just fine, AND it made me think of Jonah and Jonah 4 in particular. 

Throughout Jonah the word גדול "big" comes up more than a dozen times, although the Greek word is μέγας (mega!).

But in the last line of Jonah we do get the word "many", speaking of the many animals who would have been destroyed, not to mention the 120k+, had Yhwh not had mercy on them. The "more than" is the adjectival form of πολὺς: πλείους. So we have "many" in the conclusion of Jonah, as in Acts 18:10.

All this makes clear what God is saying to Paul in Acts. Just as God had mercy on Nineveh through the unwilling Jonah, so too will he have mercy on the people of Corinth through the willing (if slightly battered) Paul.

It is a great city, with a great many people in peril with out God's salvation. 

andres adelphoi in Acts 13

Acts 13:13–52 has Paul and Barnabas (rather than Barnabas and Saul, as in 12:25–13:12) heading to Pisidian Antioch. The round journey which began from and will end with Syrian Antioch for some reason heads 150km through the mountains from Perga to this other Antioch as the mission of 1:8 continues. Some suggest it's because Paul was having some eye issues and needed to head to higher ground for medical reasons, but that seems a bit too random. But as we see when they arrive there, a Jewish community lives there who has not yet heard about Jesus.

Image created in Accordance Bible Software

The synagogue is evidently comprised of Jews and God-fearers, and it's their identity as God's people, whether as children of Abraham or as those who have seen the light, that Paul focuses on his speech.

Structurally, it's the phrase "andres" following which gives shape to the five units of this section. The phrase occurs four times, once before the speech and at three key times during it. The final section is a compilation of eleven verses of varying responses. Here's the NIV11 with the relevant Greek:

1. Acts 13.15 “Brothers (ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί) , if you have a word of exhortation for the people, please speak.”
2. Acts 13.16 “Fellow Israelites (ἄνδρες Ἰσραηλῖται) and you Gentiles who worship God (οἱ φοβούμενοι τὸν θεόν), listen to me!"
3. Acts 13.26 “Fellow (Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί) children of Abraham and you God-fearing Gentiles (οἱ ἐν ὑμῖν φοβούμενοι τὸν θεόν), it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent."
4. Acts 13.38 “Therefore, my friends (ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί), I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you."

To explain, ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί literally means "male brothers", or "male brothers and sisters". Of course, that is ludicrous; the word ἄνδρες (male) as used here evidently means something closer to the third translation offered in the NIV: "fellow". Perhaps ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί would be better translated "Hey guys!"

The five units of this section would then be:

1. Acts 13:13–15 Hey guys, if you have something to say, please say it.
2. Acts 13:16–25 Hey guys—you God-fearers too—listen to how the story of Israel anticipates Jesus!
3. Acts 13:26–37 Hey guys—children of Abraham and any of you who fears God—this is the message of salvation!
4. Acts 13:38–41 Hey guys, hear the message of forgiveness in Jesus.
5. Acts 13:42–52 The wide variety of responses people make to the gospel.

It's probably not as reverent a translation, but it is certainly consistent, and Aussie idiomatic (as at 2019AD!). It's a great speech by Paul (via Luke), and there's a great contrast between the unifying gospel as preached to the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch and the diverse response to it afterward.

Saul and Barnabas in Acts 13

Acts 13 is really the turning point where the focus shifts from the Acts of Peter to the Acts of Paul. The beginning of the passage has a beautiful little concentric structure which draws attention to Barnabas and Saul, and to the work of the Holy Spirit.

12:25-13:1 Barnabas and Saul come to the church in Antioch

13:2aα worshipping 

13:2aβ and fasting (νηστευόντων)

13:2b Holy Spirit sets Barnabas and Saul apart

13:3aα fasting (νηστεύσαντες)

13:3aβ and praying and laying hands

13:3b Barnabas and Saul are sent out from Antioch

Looking at this structure makes sense of a couple of things which have confused some commentators. For instance, Dunn, in his wonderfully succinct commentary, wonders if the actions of fasting and praying in 13:3 is evidence the church weren't committed to obeying the calling from the Holy Spirit in v2b. But we can see this is part of a concentric structure (dare I say chiasm?) where the central idea in v2b is bracketed out in the first instance by fasting, and then by parallel ideas of worshipping and praying.

This structure could be extended to include 13:4-5 and thus make sense of the otherwise odd mention of John with them as their helper. John-Mark from 12:25 is mentioned again for no real purpose in 13:5, but with the structure could be seen as the concluding setting matching the beginning. Barnabas, Saul and John come to Antioch; Barnabas, Saul and John are sent from Antioch. What has changed in between? The Holy Spirit has (re-)commissioned them and the church has given them their blessing.

I should perhaps clarify that the words "Barnabas and Saul" aren't in 13:3-5 (the pair aren't mentioned again by name until 13:7). But they are together in 12:25 and in 13:2, and, fascinatingly, bookend the list of names in 13:1, each of whom get a second designation:

Barnabas, Simeon (Niger), Lucius (Cyrene), Manaen (Herod) and Saul.

It's a fascinating little pericope, and raises the expectations of what the Holy Spirit's work is to which he has called Barnabas and Saul to complete. Thankfully we don't have to wait long at all: we will find out in the next few verses that they are to bind and to loose, bringing both judgement and salvation (13:6-12).

Chiasms in Acts 1

We're starting a year preaching through Acts, and this week is the beginning of all that. There are two chiastic structures in the first chapter which grabbed my eye (undoubtedly there are others). The first is on the micro-scale, while the other encompasses the second of three parts of this chapter.

Acts 1:2

This first one is a syntactical chiasm, which means that to read it logically you need to follow a chiastic structure.

ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας
        ἐντειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις
                διὰ πνεύματος ἁγίου
        οὓς ἐξελέξατο
ἀνελήμφθη.   

If you were to read it out in the written order, it would be: Until the day, having commanded the apostles, by the Holy Spirit, whom (plural) he had chosen, he was taken up.

But by rearranging the clauses by matching the first and last, second and fourth, and then central, gives you the English order: Until the day he was taken up, having commanded the apostles whom he had chosen, by the Holy Spirit. 

Why do this? I would guess to put the concept of the choosing of the Holy Spirit central, as this theme will reoccur often in the book, especially in chapter 2, but also in the choosing of Matthias to replace Judas.

Acts 1:4-8

This second one is what I am now trying to call a concentric or ring structure, which is organised more along thematic lines as follows:

4a Geography (don't leave Jerusalem)
        4a-5 Holy Spirit (you'll receive the promised Holy Spirit just as John spoke of)
                6 Kingdom (which kingdom will this be? cf Kingdom of God in 1:3)
        7-8a Holy Spirit (you will receive power as you receive the Holy Spirit)
8b Geography (You will go out from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth)

Again, why? Well, the book of Acts will work as a travelogue, more or less following the course described in 1:8b, from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. Secondly, the Holy Spirit will be present and directing all the work that happens in evangelism and strengthening. And thirdly, God's kingdom will be continually contrasted with the kingdoms of this earth (in particular Rome), and shown to be not only superior but also eternal and centred around Jesus the king.

Acts 1 Chiasm

Luke-Acts exam in a few hours.
a little chiasm to keep you going:

Acts 1.2

a   ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας
b       ἐντειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις
c           διὰ πνεύματος ἁγίου
b'      οὓς ἐξελέξατο
a'  ἀνελήμφθη

... until the day he was taken up (a,a')
after commanding the apostles he had chosen (b,b')
by the holy spirit (c)

you like?

Club Member or Kingdom Citizen

as mooted, here is my article published just recently in AFES's Salt.

i should add, i didn't think of the title, that was all their idea. but it's something i want to keep thinking about, particularly as it has real impacts for how people think about what Christianity is when they first investigate it. maybe think, as you read it, how this way of thinking about Christianity (if you agree) could come in handy as you chat to people.

[i think my article's the 2nd row, 3rd from the right!]

A friend of mine was considering becoming a Christian. Maybe you too, dear reader, one day did the same. And like my friend, did you weigh up the pros and cons? Did you ‘count the cost’ as we say?

Is that a right view of becoming a Christian – is this the right way of working it out?

[Christianity is heaps like a club]

My friend was in many ways right to evaluate Christianity like a club. As he observed it, we all have a common purpose, we all share a love of the same thing (Jesus), and although we don’t have a dress code (Kathmandu jumpers and polo shirts aside), we do have an ethical code. We try to think things through in light of God’s commands and how they’re renewed in Jesus. You join up by applying (praying) and you’re accepted (Acts 16:31)!

BUT these are only things in common with a club. Indeed, most of the problems we see today in the church world have come from people seeing Christianity as a club and changing the rules as you might in a club: if Christianity is a club, then it’s a democracy. It’s got people who are voted in, and if enough of you want to change the rules of the club, or the emphases of a club, you do it.

[Christianity isn’t a club :: it’s a Kingdom]

One massive theme in the New Testament is that Jesus is the King of the whole world. He didn’t get voted for, there was no election, there was no charter of responsibilities and so on. The only one who had any say on the matter (God!) said that Jesus was His chosen son, Messiah, King.

You might feel a bit disenfranchised by this – why don’t I get a say, you say. Well possibly, because the club you would’ve made wouldn’t last!

If you’re part of a club – what do you have at the end of the day? You might get to along to a few meetings, get the club t-shirt (everyone loves those Christian t-shirts), and really have a great time of it. But if that is all Christianity is to you, then at the end of the day you’ve been sold a lie. The club will fold when there isn’t a quorum to vote, the club will get taken over, you’ll find out the things you signed up for in the first place aren’t even part of it anymore.

Christians believe that God speaks to us specifically, that the Bible is God’s Word to his people, by his Spirit, about his son. However in a club we don’t need this specific revelation; we can work it out for ourselves. Being part of a kingdom sees a purposeful revelation, a royal proclamation, with warnings, encouragements, promises and reasons to rejoice with your sovereign.

If Jesus is King, then there is a much bigger picture of reality we’re part of.

Philippians 3:20: “But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Saviour from there, the Lord Jesus Christ”. This is a deliberate portrayal of the peace won by Christ (Pax Christi) in terms of the Peace won by Rome (Pax Romana). Jesus guarantees your safety, will bring his army to protect you, will not let the enemy prevail.

If Christianity is a Kingdom, then you are safe. You will be safe. You are part of something bigger than yourself, which will continue on into eternity. You haven’t signed up, but you’ve been conquered. If you trust in Jesus, you are part of a kingdom that will never fade, spoil or perish, but is united and galvanised around the only sure anchor in the storm, and you serve under a king who gave his life for you, the one who sits in the power-seat of the universe, at the Right Hand of the Almighty.

fave bible verses

well, at least ones that make me chuckle:

1. ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

   (Acts 26:14)
   
   it was particularly funny until i actually looked up 'goads' in the dictionary, but i still giggle
   
   

2. [Elisha] went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria.

   (2 Kings 2:23-25)
   
   i'm not sure if it's the 'go up', the 'baldhead', or the 'she-bears' that particularly gets me. or the way the story just continues on, completely disregarding the fact 42 youths have just been mauled!
   
   

3. I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!

   
   (Galations 5:12)
   
   reminds me of a joke. which i shan't tell. about a blind rabbi.

got any others to contribute?

the question of the phoenix

following my most successful post ever (one of these days i'll crack 10, is there anything more gratifying? that's a retorical question, btw), the question below was raised from my good friend alphabet soup:

"Some Christians are against embryonic stem cell research. For argument's sake, if such research were approved in Australia and did yield cures for some diseases, should those same Christians refuse the resultant treatments e.g. for Alzheimer's?
"Should Christians who have a problem with Maccas also not use Ronald McDonald's House on principle?"

i guess i would argue that the genesis of the technology may be less important than the technology itself.
that is to say, from my interest in science history* that the way particular inventions came about were often at best chance, often by-products (think alchemy) of ingenious, yet mad, or greedy, or misled "scientists", would lead me to say that there would be very little we could continue to use, were we to determine the morality of the wakening of each invention. not that we shouldn't be discerning. that is something i believe each person should be, rather:

Romans 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good,[...]

we know that when men do things we may perceive as evil, intended for evil (such as Joseph and his bro's), God uses them for his good purposes. we can have confidence, so long as it does not offend our consciences - for that is sin, that God uses all things for the good of those who love him.

just as the phoenix was reborn from the fire, alzheimers sufferers may be reborn from embryonic stem cell research, and go on to love and serve the LORD. that we may disagree with their means and methodologies, may believe that the same, or even better result may be gained via use of adult stem cells, reflects on our views now towards research. not towards the good that may be gained thru it.

again, Acts 24:16 So I always take pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man.
if your conscience is not clear, don't do it. if it is, especially towards God, then that's between you and God.

(and no, i'd probably see if there was someone who would be able to show hospitality to his brother in Christ and stay on their couch rather than at ronald's place. i think.)

* read the left hand of the electron by isaac asimov. just do. you won't regret it!