THE BIBLE SPEAKS

 

by Lawrence W. Althouse

 

ARE WE PENTECOSTAL?

 

October 5, 2008

 

Background Scripture:

Acts 2:1-47.

Devotional Reading:

Ephesians 2:11-22.

 

        Some years ago, in a newspaper interview, because I had twice used the term, “Holy Spirit,” the interviewer asked, “So, are you a Pentecostal?” ”Certainly,” I replied, “but not necessarily the way in which you understand that term.”

From the earliest days, all who are followers of Christ have access to the Holy Spirit. The first Pentecost was for all who would receive the gospel, repent and be baptized (2:38).  So we all are Pentecostals and also charismatics (Greek: recipients of the gracious gifts of God).

Unfortunately, the media have represented the Pentecostal promise as the exclusive property of those who have undergone an ecstatic experience, “speaking in tongues” with Acts 2 as the scriptural basis. But the ecstatic utterances in Acts 2 are of recognizable languages, not the unintelligible, inarticulate, meaningless sounds that are the norm for much that is called “speaking in tongues” or glossalalia, another Greek term. (See I Cor.12). (Glossalalia has been practiced not only by Christians, but by other religious peoples.)

 

WHAT SHALL WE DO?

The purpose of Pentecost was to make clear the basis and invitation of the gospel, not to hide it, and listeners to Peter’s sermon were “cut to the heart and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Brethren, what shall we do?’” Peter’s reply: ‘Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’” (2:37,38). Notice: Peter did not add, “And speak in tongues.”

So, in Acts 2, the utterances in “other tongues” were meant to unify the people gathered together. Yet in 1 Corinthians 12-14, Paul regarded the misuse of tongue-speaking as divisive. Not edifying to the whole congregation, it is of value only to the speaker. Paul ends up saying, “…in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (1 Cor. 14:19).

So, what about glossalalia? Like Paul, I believe that it can be a valuable experience for some, particularly in private devotions: in public worship it should be employed under the strictures laid out by him. But, if the result is division among the people of God, then it is a gift wrongly received and employed, for “…since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church” (1 Cor. 14:12). Divisions are not of the Spirit.

LAW AND SPIRIT

One of Judaism’s oldest and most popular festivals, Pentecost means fiftieth day after the consecration of the harvest. This one-day festival was also known as “The Feast of Weeks,” “The Feast of Harvest,” and “The Day of the First Fruits.” But in later Judaism it was also celebrated as the anniversary of the giving of the law to Moses at Sinai, complimented at the first Christian Pentecost by the giving of the Holy Spirit..  

Theodore P. Ferris suggests that the significance can be embodied in a five-fold pattern. First, “What Jesus did”—demonstrating through his teachings, signs and wonders, Jesus revealed the power and purpose of God in everyday life. Second, “What you did”---“...you crucified (him) by the hands of lawless men” (2:23). “The best that man can conceive despoiled by the worst to which man can stoop” (Ferris).

Third, “What God did”---“But God raised him up…” (2:24). God did not prevent the cross, “But he wondrously reversed the verdict and changed the cross from the seal of death to the sign of salvation and the entrance to life” (Ferris). Fourth, “What are we doing now?”---This Jesus God raised up and of that we all are witnesses” (2:32). Finally, “What you can do?”---“Repent, and be baptized…and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (2:38).

The charismatic power for our Pentecostal mission.

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

THE BIBLE SPEAKS

 

By Lawrence W. Althouse

 

THE ‘NEW GUYS’AT CHURCH

 

October 12, 2008

 

Background Scripture:

Acts 6:1-15; 8:1-8...

Devotional Reading:

Acts 1:3-11.

 

        As a seminary student assigned to serve a little congregation way off the beaten track in the mountains of Eastern Pennsylvania, I was quite unprepared for my first experience of church life as a pastor. Acquainted with the seemingly exemplary depiction of the early church in Acts, I found it difficult to accommodate to the reality of disagreement and dissention. Later, I realized that there actually had not been so much conflict—it just seemed to be so at the time.

        I also have come to realize that the church life depicted in Acts was not as idyllic as I had first thought. Even before Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection, there had been some tension and dispute within the band of his close disciples. And in the post-resurrection churches there was almost immediately some dissention and division. So, what should be different in Christian congregations is not the absence of conflict, but in the way that we handle it.

        According to Acts 6, the first recorded controversy in the early church occurred between two distinctive groups. First there were the Jews who spoke Aramaic, the language of Jesus and the Jerusalem church. It is believed to have been the language of the Patriarchs before their entry into Palestine and before the evolution of the Hebrew language. For the most part, it was the language of the Old Testament and the Jewish people for a thousand years. But in the century prior to the birth of Jesus, Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew, became the common language of the Jews. So, in Jesus’ day to be a Jew meant to speak Aramaic.

SPIRITUALLY SNOBBISH

In order to carry on trade, however, many Jews, particularly those in Jerusalem, also spoke Greek and, in time, it became the normal language of these Jews. So in the earliest days of the Church there are both Aramaic-speaking and Greek-speaking Jews and there is evidence indicating that the former group considered itself as superior to the latter group. This difference was something of an irritant in the early church. It is believed that the Jews speaking Aramaic were spiritually snobbish and looked down on their Greek-speaking brethren.

        In the synagogues at that time there was a common concern among the Jews for those less fortunate. It was customary on Friday mornings to take up a collection of cash and goods in the market places and private homes. Food, sufficient for one week, was distributed weekly to the poor. The distribution was called the Kuppah, or basket. There was also a daily collection for those in even greater need. This was called the Tamhui or tray.

        So it was in these distributions that we are told, “…the Hellenists (Greek-speaking Jews) murmured against the Aramaic-speaking Hebrews “because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution” (6:1). Were their widows really “neglected” or was that just their perception? And if they were “neglected,” was it on purpose?  Were the Aramaic-speaking Jews resentful of  those “new guys” in the church or were the Greek-speaking Jewish Christians hyper-sensitive as the “new guys”? Probably there were some of both.

DIVISION OF LABOR

        The problem was turned over to the twelve, Jesus’ inner circle, and their first response was a b it on the defensive side: “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables” (6:1b). Essentially, I think their reasoning was correct—that there needed to be a division of labor in the church—but I wouldn’t want to indicate that distributing help to the poor and needy is a lesser calling than preaching and teaching. St, Francis of Assisi is remembered, not so much for what he preached, but what he did for people in need.

        The solution that came from the twelve was a good one: “…pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom…” (6:3). “Good repute” is probably the easiest of these to find, but “full of the Spirit and of wisdom” may seem much more difficult. “Full of the Spirit” probably means someone who is open and responsive to the Spirit, whop relies on wisdom rather than force or coercion. Was everyone satisfied with this solution? Probably not. But did it help to bridge the gulf between the “Old Guard” and the “New Guys” in the church?

            For a time it did, but there are always “New Guys” coming into our church.(64)

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BIBLE SPEAKS

 

By Lawrence W. Althouse

 

                                                    

THE “REAL YOU”

 

October 19, 2008

 

Background Scripture:

Acts 9:1-31.

Devotional Reading:

Galatians 1:11-24.

 

        William Barclay calls the life-changing experience of  Saul/Paul on the road to  Damascus “the most famous conversion story in history.” Even many Christians who are unaware of much of the New Testament are aware that Paul had an experience there that changed his life, as well as the course of Christianity. An infamous and ruthless persecutor of Christians, Paul’s experience on the Damascus road transformed him from a rabid opponent of Christ to an apostle who began the spread of gospel worldwide. (To compare other references to that experience, see: also Acts 22:4-16; 26:9-18; Galatians 1:13-17; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8).

             Since Paul’s story is probably so familiar to most of us, I would like to concentrate on the role of Ananias in this great event. And I have chosen to do this because, even though he played a key role in the conversion of Paul,  Ananias is sadly  unknown to most Christians.

             Possibly one reason is that there were actually three men in the New Testament bearing the name of Ananias (ANNA-nye-us), meaning “God is gracious.. (There are also two men by this name in the Apocryphal books of Tobit and Judith).

A WHITEWASHED WALL

             Two of those bearing that name in the New Testament were anything but exemplary. The first Ananias is mentioned in Acts 5:1-10. along with his wife Sapphira (su-FIRE-uh), both of whom came to a sorry end because they were dishonest with the apostles about their ability to contribute---definitely negative examples. Another Ananias is found in Acts 23:3, the Jerusalem high priest in charge of Paul’s contentious appearance before the Sanhedrin, the Jewish Council exercising ecclesiastical authority over Jews everywhere. Paul got intro trouble by calling this Ananias a “whitewashed wall” (23:3).

            If the name “Ananias” rang a bell in your memory, it was almost probably one of the two mentioned above. But it is the third Ananias whom we need to remember and revere because of his key role in Paul’s Damascus road experience. He was a Jewish Christian disciple living in Damascus. Whether or not he had known Jesus personally, he had become a Christian before Paul’s conversion. When God spoke to Ananias in a dream and told him to go to Paul to greet him as a Christian brother, Ananias was understandably fearful and hesitant. He had heard terrible stories about Paul as a persecutor of followers of The Way.

           What makes Ananias special, is that despite his justified fears, he was nevertheless obedient to God’s instructions and performed the following: (1) He greeted Paul as a Christian brother; (2) He guided Paul in understanding his experience on the Damascus road; (3) He baptized Paul---and is never mentioned again.

AN ADMIRABLE ANANIAS

            I have singled out Ananias because, while we so greatly admire Paul and his apostleship, most of us are more likely to identify with Ananias. Few of us begin as persecutors of Christians and few, if any of us end up as apostle with the stature of St. Paul. We are likely to be more modest in our natural endowments, but Ananias shows us that even such as we can play a vital role in God’s plan and purpose---if., like Ananias, we regard ourselves as having a God-given purpose in our lives. We have not just joined a church, but become part of a worldwide movement. And, if, like Ananias, we are open and expectant to receive from God direction for our lives, trust in him more than we believe in our fears, and respond to his call wherever and however he leads us.

            Ananias is a follower of The Way of Christ who challenges us, not to ask why we’re not like Paul or even like Ananias, but why we are not like the person God intended for us to be when he brought us into this world. The real you, like the real Ananias, would be more than you imagine.

 

THE BIBLE SPEAKS

 

By Lawrence W. Althouse

 

                                                    

ARE WE USEFUL?

 

October 26, 2008

 

Background Scripture:

Acts 13.

Devotional Reading:

Matthew 28:16-20.

 

        A few months ago a pastor in Tennessee called and told me that some years ago he clipped and filed one of my columns from his local newspaper. He said he was leading a Bible study the next day and dug out my column because it was relevant to his Bible study.

As we talked, however, it was apparent that he had saved it as a negative illustration to the point he expected to make. Apparently, my column had been on Joshua and I had said that, if there is any conflict between the revelation of God through Joshua and that of Jesus, I would always opt for the revelation through Jesus. “Did you really mean to say that?” he asked me and I said that I did. “And you still believe that now?” and I affirmed that. “But,” he asked, “how could there be any difference or disagreement between them?”

FELLOW CHRISTIANS?

        To make a 45-minute conversation short, my explanation did not please him, so finally, I interjected, “Look, it doesn’t appear that you and I will agree on this. I guess we need to quit and simply affirm each other as brothers in Christ. OK?” There was a long pause before he said, “OK.” I knew that was hard for him because he had already implied that Christian brotherhood required agreement on matters of the faith. He is far from being alone in that conviction.

        Acts and some of the New Testament epistles tell us that disagreement between Jesus’ followers occurred from the faith’s earliest days. In Acts 13:5, Luke tells us that when Barnabas and Paul went out on the First Missionary Journey, “…they had John to assist them.”

 There are a number of people named “John” in the New Testament, so which one is this? This is not John who was a member of the Twelve. Nor was he the “John” who wrote the Fourth Gospel, the epistles of John, or the Book of Revelation. Like Paul and many other Jews of his day, this disciple had two names: a Jewish first name and a Greek second name—John Mark. It was John Mark who was a close associate of Simon Peter (Acts 12:12-17), the cousin of Barnabas who accompanied Barnabas and Paul on part of their first missionary journey and

very probably he was the writer of the Gospel According to Mark.

USEFULTO CHRIST

        Although Luke merely tells us that, when they got to Perga in Pamphylia, “And John left them and returned to Jerusalem” (13:13), B.H. Throckmorton and other scholars believe that John Mark left Paul and Barnabas because was upset that Paul seemed to have edged out Barnabas as head of the mission. Later, when Paul planned his second missionary journey, he refused to accept John Mark in the mission group, a decision that led eventually to a break between Paul and Barnabas. So this was a serious split in the early Christian movement.

 

       

 

 

But that is not the end of the story! In two of Paul’s later letters, Colossians 4:10 and Philemon 24, Paul’s mention of John Mark indicates that they have been reconciled and that

John Mark is with him in his place of imprisonment (either Rome or Ephesus). In 2 Timothy 4:11, Paul is represented as telling Timothy to bring John Mark, “for he is very useful in serving me.” We do not know what brought this about, but in light of the gospel that Paul preached and taught and the evangel that John Mark penned in his gospel, it is likely that they

concluded they could not be remain divided and still be useful to the same Lord.

        Is this just musty, old church history? No, this is a glimpse of Christianity today, too, when followers of Jesus Christ seek to preserve their own theological integrity at the cost of great harm to the witness and unity of the Church of Jesus Christ.