ACTS 1
Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is
come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all
Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
https://youtu.be/7UqPubfdyTM Acts 1
ON VIDEO-
.The Jesus movement
.Is it just a ‘story’?
.Act’s proven to be historically accurate
.How?
.Industrial revolution leads to field of archeology
.We found stuff
.field of documentary evidence arose-
.That proved it too
.Sir Ramsey changed his mind
.Church in world history
.Descartes- Copernicus- etc.
.Acts-
.Jesus ascends
.Wait for the promise of the Father
.Judas replaced
.Power is on the way
.History-
.early 20th century- Spirit comes to Azusa
.Then at Duquesne University
.Catholics get it too
.Charismatic movement
PAST TEACHING [below are my past links/teaching I did that
relate to today’s video- ACTS 1]
https://ccoutreach87.com/overview-of-philosophy/
[Mentioned Aristotle and Plato on
today’s video- Here’s my past teaching on them]
https://ccoutreach87.com/atheism-apologetics-links-added/
ACTS study
Introduction; Yesterday I took my kids to the mall after
church, I usually get lost in the book store. Even though I bought an entire
shelf of books a few months back, I still can’t help from buying more books! So
I picked up a few more and found a comfortable bench and started reading the
History of Christianity. At the house I am almost thru with another ‘history of
Christianity’ that covers the story of the church from Pentecost to the present
day. I own a few complete volumes and have checked out many from the libraries
over the years. I read from both the Protestant and Catholic [Orthodox]
perspectives. I also read from the ‘out of the institutional church’ perspective.
These are the histories of various groups of believers who never became
Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant. I consider all these groups Christian and
appreciate the tremendous wealth of knowledge that these communities provide.
Now, as we go thru Acts, I want to stay as close as possible
to both the doctrine and practices of the early church as seen in scripture. We
are not the first [or last!] study that has attempted to do this. That is
attempted to ‘get back to the original design’ as much as possible.
Historically you have whole categories of believers who fit into this mindset.
They are referred to as ‘Restorationist’ as opposed to Catholic, Protestant or
Orthodox. The Church
of Christ , The Disciples
of Christ, the Anabaptists and others fall into this class. I believe you find
true believers in all of these groups.
As you read the history of Christianity as told by the other
perspectives, you will find it interesting as to the way the institutional
church describes these ‘out of church’ groups. Some are called heretics
[Waldensians] others are simply seen as fringe groups. The strong institutional
church has branded those who would reject her authority as schismatics and
heretics on the grounds of their refusal to submit to the hierarchy of the
institutional church.
As we go thru Acts, I want us to read carefully and see the
story as told by Luke. We will not find ‘another more true group’ in the sense
that I want to start some new denomination. I also don’t want to simply find
proof texts to justify doctrine. Many well meaning believers can find the
verses they like the most and use them to combat the other points of view. We
will see verses emphasizing the importance of water baptism, or various truths
on the outworkings of the Spirit. We will see prophets functioning and read
texts that clearly teach Gods sovereignty [as many as were ordained unto
eternal life believed]. Instead of getting lost on these side trails, I want us
to read with an open mind and allow our beliefs to be shaped by ‘the story’.
I will spend time defending my own view of Local church. Not
because I believe ‘my view’ is the only thing worth arguing about, but because
I believe we see the intent of God for his people to be a living community of
believers in this book. Right off the bat we will see giving taught in a
radical way. The early church at Jerusalem
will ‘continue in the Apostles doctrine and breaking of bread and prayers’.
They then sell their goods and distribute to all who had need. Where in the
world did they get this idea from? The Apostles doctrine obviously taught the
plain teachings from Jesus on sharing what you have with others. So instead of
seeing an early tithe concept, you see an early ‘give to those in need idea’
straight from the teachings of Jesus. We will see this early Jerusalem group meet daily, as opposed to
seeing ‘Sunday worship’ as some sort of New Testament Sabbath. Of course this
group will meet at the Temple
[actually an out door courtyard called Solomon’s Porch] and from ‘house to
house’. But the simple realty of Christ’s Spirit being poured out on them as a
community of people will be the basic understanding of what ‘church’ is.
You will find citizens of many surrounding areas going back
to the their home towns after Pentecost. These believers shared the gospel with
those in their regions and this is how the early church would spread. Some
commentaries will show you how when Paul will eventually show up in Rome there already was an
established church there. They obviously heard the gospel from these early
Roman Jews who were at Jerusalem
during Pentecost. So we will see ‘church planting’ from the paradigm of simple
believers going to areas with the message of Christ. Those who would believe in
these locations would be described as ‘the church at Corinth ’ or ‘the church at Ephesus ’ and so on. So we see ‘local church’
as communities of believers living in different localities.
We will see the development of leadership along the lines of
‘appoint elders in every city’. Not a top heavy idea of ‘Bishop’ in the later sense of Catholic
belief, but a simple ordaining [recognizing!] of those in the various cities
who were stable enough in the basic truths of the gospel, that in Paul’s
absence these elders were to be trusted as spiritual guides. Now, many of our
brothers can trace the historic office of Bishop as a fairly early development
in church history. Polycarp and others were considered direct disciples of the
Apostles who would be seen as Bishops and even write of the importance of
Bishops for the church ‘Where there is no Bishop there is no church’.
This will cause many well meaning believers to eventually
become Catholic/Orthodox as they read the church fathers and see the very early
development of Catholic Christianity. In many of the church fathers writings
you will also see an early belief in the Eucharist as being the actual Body and
Blood of Jesus.
To the consternation of many Protestants you even find
Luther condemning fellow Protestants for not taking literally the words of
Jesus ‘this IS my Body’. Now, I will not defend transubstantiation, but try to
follow the trend lines in Acts as to the lack of this doctrine being a part of
the early church. We will find Paul’s letter to the Corinthians addressing the
Lords Supper, but for the most part we do not see a strong belief in the
transmitting of divine grace to the soul thru the eating of Christ’s literal
Body and Blood as they ‘broke bread’. We do see the sharing of the common meal
and the ‘Eucharist’ as one meal called the ‘love feast’. Only later on in
church history is there a division made between the full fellowship meal and
the Eucharist.
So to be frank about it, I will challenge both our Catholic
and Orthodox brothers on some very fundamental beliefs. Well I hope this brief
introduction sets the proper tone for the rest of this study, God bless you
guys and I hope you get something out of it.
John.
(738) ACTS 1- Luke,
the writer of this book, feels the need to document the ongoing work of Jesus
and his revolution. He already wrote a gospel and believes this to be the
beginning of the story. In essence, the reality of Jesus and his resurrection
are just the start, we have much more to do and become on this journey. Most
writers jump to chapter 2. We have churches and music groups called ‘Acts chapter
2’. Why does Luke seem to wait till chapter 2 before getting to ‘the good
stuff’? Chapter one records the 40 days of Jesus showing himself alive after
his death. Luke feels this singular truth to be important enough to simply
stand alone [I do realize the early letters did not have chapter and verse
divisions like today]. The real physical fact of Jesus bodily resurrection is
without a doubt the foundational truth of the gospel. The outpouring of the
Spirit and the whole future of the church depends on the reality of the
resurrected Christ. Paul will write the Corinthians and tell them if the
resurrection were not true then they are the most miserable of all people. Luke
tells us Jesus gave instructions for the Apostles to wait at Jerusalem for the Spirit. They will be
witnesses of him to all the surrounding nations after the Spirit empowers them.
We also see Peter emerge as the key spokesman for the group. He quotes freely
from the Psalms and reads their own history into the book. He sees the prophetic
verse from David on ‘let another take his office’ as referring to Judas
betrayal and death. They cast lots and choose Matthias as the one to replace
Judas. Peter shows the importance of Judas replacement to come from one that
was with them thru out the earthly time of Jesus. Someone who saw and witnessed
Jesus after the resurrection. Scholars have confused this with the ‘ascension
gift Apostles’. Some scholars have taken the truth of the early Apostles having
the criteria of being actual witnesses of Jesus, and have said ‘therefore, you
have no Apostles today’. Paul will teach in Ephesians that after Jesus
ascension on high he gave gifts unto men ‘some Apostles, others Prophets, etc.’
The New Testament clearly speaks of Apostles as an ongoing gift in the church.
Barnabas will later be called an Apostles [Acts 14:14 ] as well as many other references in the original
Greek using the same Greek word for Apostle. But here we find Peter seeing the
need to replace Judas. Other scholars think Peter might have jumped the gun.
They see Paul’s apostleship as the possible person the Lord picked out as the
replacement. You do find Paul referring time and again to his Apostolic
authority as one ‘born out of due time’ who saw Jesus on the Damascus road. If Paul was simply an
ascension gift Apostle, why would he refer time and again to his authority
based on being a witness who also saw Jesus? It’s possible that Paul was in
this group of ‘Apostles of the Lamb’ who had extra authority based upon their
testimony of being eyewitnesses. So in chapter one we see that Jesus appeared
for 40 days giving instructions to the early leadership and told them to wait
at Jerusalem
for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. We see the incarnational purpose of God,
Jesus was and continues to be the express image of God to man. He was not some
‘phantom’ like the Docetists will claim, but a very real physical resurrected
Lord. Luke begins the early history of the church with this reality being
important enough to stand on its own.
[parts]
(1357) I WILL UNCOVER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN HIDDEN SINCE THE
WORLDS FIRST DAY- [Jesus]. Yesterday I read an article in the paper that talked
about an amazing dinosaur find in China; they found around 15 thousand fossils
in a cave area. The amazing thing was the fact that so many dinosaurs would
have been in one place right when they died. I immediately saw this as proof
that would back up the creationist cataclysmic view of a worldwide flood
destroying all life on the planet. As I read thru the article they explained
how much of ‘fossil science’ has been done thru finds in the U.S., but over the
last few years China [and the eastern world in general] have undergone their
own industrial revolution and this has led to the unearthing of new ground for
the purpose of construction and these new projects are unearthing these
fossils. Much like what took place in the 19th century when many
archaeologists were discovering ‘hidden things’ that seemed to be buried ‘since
the foundation of the world’. In the 19th century it was popular for
the intellectuals in theology to embrace the ‘historical/critical’ method of
bible learning. Many began to reject the early dating of the New Testament
[early- a.d. 50-70] and began accepting a theory that said much of the New
Testament was written in the 2nd century. These ideas were promoted
by men like Rudolph Bultman and were made popular at the German university
which he taught at [in Marburg]. So it became ‘intellectually fashionable’ to
accept this new way of critiquing scripture. One problem- as the industrial
revolution took off in the west archeology rose as a new science and we now had
the ability to historically search for clues. A famous historian by the name of
Sir Ramsey went on this exhibition to see whether or not the bible was accurate
when it spoke about ‘so called’ first century things. Our bibles do have lots
of names of political characters and certain historical events that can be
measured for accuracy. Ramsey found to his dismay that all the evidence leaned
towards the ‘less enlightened’ view of an early dating of the New Testament.
This was a tough pill to swallow by the intellectuals who had already formed
their opinions on the subject, but in due time most trustworthy scholars would
come to accept [for the most part] the earlier dating. So now back to the
dinosaurs, as the article went on they admitted that it’s possible that a
Tsunami might have caused the dinosaurs to gather in one place before their
deaths- A FLOOD! It’s funny because some in the modern scientific community
have argued, very convincingly, that the Geologic table and the extinction of
the dinosaurs can be attributed to a world wide flood. Others have vehemently
opposed this idea [most evolutionists]. And now the new evidence seems to be
backing up a flood theory, they simply don’t want to admit it. Like the
intellectuals of Sir Ramsey’s day, the smart thing to do is to go where the
evidence leads. The facts don’t lie; these are ‘facts’ that are being now
uncovered, things hidden ‘since the world’s first day’.
[parts]
HISTORY OF EVERYTHING- IN 1 HOUR
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that
perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be
saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should
believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but
had pleasure in unrighteousness. ... 2nd
Thes. 2:10-13
https://youtu.be/uwDi82SICXo History of everything in 1 hour [part 1]
ON VIDEO-
.Did my ‘prophecy’ come true? Watch and see
.They said a rocket hit the plane
.What did Patience say?
.Update on detention center
.Bishop Mulvey
.I was right about Devon Anderson- planned parenthood- the
judge said she broke the law
.Where did the animals come from?
.Is the story true?
Mesopotamia
.Palestine
.Aristotle
.They were looking for the ‘LOGOS’
.Ptolemy
.Copernicus
.Cosmology
.Scientific/Industrial revolution
.Sir Ramsey and documentary evidence
.Luke/Acts as historical evidence
.Phenomenological language
.Aquinas- Anselm and Augustine
.Richard Dawkins alien creator
.Einstein and the big bang
.C.S. Lewis
.Everything is proof of God
MY LINKS-
[parts]
(766) Let
me interrupt our Judges study a little. Right now [2008] there is another
renewal/revival movement taking place in Florida [Lakeland]. The brother who
was used as the ‘fire starter’ is Todd Bentley. I have tried to catch the
services on T.V. and appreciate the presence of the Lord. Of course you can go
on line and read terrible stuff about the revival. Once again some are 100 %
against it, others are a little too exaggerated in their language in defense of
it. What I mean is it’s easy to see a move of God and believe ‘this is the
final move that will out do all other moves in the history of the church’ the
‘latter glory’ if you will. Let’s do a little history on moves of God. The
present Pentecostal movement started at the beginning of the last century [for
the most part]. You had a brother by the name of Charles Parham in Topeka,
Kansas who had this little bible school. One day they experienced an unusual
event. Gods Spirit fell on the students and they all ‘began to speak in other
languages’. Now, to those who reject the modern gift of tongues as ‘gibberish’,
I want you to see something. The ‘tongues’ [languages] of this experience were
actually real foreign languages that the speakers never learned. They were very
much like the ‘tongues’ at Pentecost! Parham took this as a modern day
Pentecost and began sending these students to foreign countries, believing that
they would be able to evangelize the world without having to teach the
students/missionaries the foreign language of their field. Well this experiment
flopped! Even the accurate Pentecostal historians will tell you this. But we
are still left with the supernatural account of the kids having spoken in
languages that they never learned. Parham was a strange type of fellow. He
believed in the ‘seed of the serpent’ doctrine and a few other weird things. He
was also very racist! He allowed a black student by the name of William Seymour
to sit out in the hall and hear his teaching. He could not ‘intermingle’ with
the white students in class. Seymour was a humble uneducated man who had a
heart for God. Seymour would eventually find his ‘harvest field’ in Los
Angeles. He began preaching at different churches and would experience strange
manifestations equal to the things that Parham experienced. The churches did
not appreciate this unlearned, one eyed black preacher introducing these
strange ‘manifestations’ into their congregations and eventually Seymour rented
a building on Azusa street. In 1906 this Azusa street mission would become
ground zero for the outpouring of the modern day Pentecostal movement. Seymour
was a very humble man by all accounts. He was known for sticking his head
inside a box on the pulpit so the people wouldn’t see him instead of the Lord.
The L.A. papers would run front page stories on ‘the strange tongues of Babel’
and stuff like that. Though Seymour was young and inexperienced at ‘running a
revival’ he tried to the best of his ability to follow the Lord. He would
contact Parham and ask him to come and check out the move. Parham came and
totally denounced the wild meetings as spiritists run amok! Even though Parham
had himself experienced the gift of tongues at his bible school, he saw the
unrestrained nature of Azusa and condemned it. Seymour would never invite him
back. The little mission building at Azusa would become the place of pilgrimage
for 20th century Pentecostalism. Some were adamantly opposed to the
outpouring, others 100 % supporters. After 100 years of seeing what the outcome
would be, the historical significance is hard to refute. Some still see the
worldwide spread of Pentecostalism as error. Others see it as a fulfillment of
the scriptures that in the last days God would pour out his Spirit on all
flesh. I see Pentecostals as part of the Body of Christ and in no way reject
them as heretics. This doesn’t mean I agree with them in every doctrine! [As
you can see when you read this site]. I feel we need to keep things in
perspective when we feel God is moving in a new way. Is it possible that ‘this
move’[any move that you happen to be in at the time] will have worldwide
historic results? Sure. But because the Body of Christ is so wide and diverse
in our day, it is harder for a single move to have the same type of impact as
the original Pentecost. Should we judge the initial outpouring at Parham’s
school as demonic? I don’t think so. The fact that they mistakenly took the
gift as being missionary in nature does not disqualify the gift. In Act’s
chapter 2 the gift of being able to speak in a language never learned did allow
the immediate hearers to hear the gospel in their distinct languages. But the
actual ‘missionaries’ [the hearers who went back to their towns] spread the
message in their own known language. So in all types of moves you can find real
fault, as well as real truth [most of the time]. We as the people of God should
‘test the spirits, because every spirit is not of God’ [1st John] while at the
same time keeping an open mind like the head leader of religion in the book of
Act’s, Gamaliel. He said ‘let’s leave the disciples alone for now, if this work
is of God you will not be able to stop it. If it’s not of God it will fall by
itself’. I personally believe in most of the renewal and revival movements of
our day. I try not to get over excited by some of the language that tends to
see these moves as ‘the last and greatest move of all time’. But I also avoid
the constant attacks by the apologists who seem to never find a move they can
agree with. [see entry # 844]
[parts]
The Iliad and Odyssey [Homer]
I want to cover some of the classics of
Western Literature- when I do the philosophy and science stuff- the purpose is
to show how God- and ‘religion’ are an inescapable thread that we see all thru
out history- and in fact- the rise of what we call ‘intellectualism’ did indeed
come from the Judaic/Christian tradition [for instance- the modern day
university system did come from the Church].
Ok- lets start with what most
believe to be the greatest work from antiquity- outside of the bible.
These are 2 poems by Homer- the Iliad
and Odyssey.
These poems were written in the 8th
century BCE- and cover the Trojan war- which most believe was a real war- that
took place in the 12th-13th century BCE.
In Homers works we read about
this epic battle.
The war starts with- once again-
a ‘woman’ issue.
Prince Paris of Troy steals Helen
of Greece- from her husband King Menelaus [king of Sparta].
The Greeks- led by Achilles- lay
siege to Troy.
In Homers telling of the event-
the Greeks are actually defending the honor of marriage- and are carrying out a
just retribution against an unjust act.
Sort of the same themes we read
in scripture- when the sons of Jacob defended the honor of their sister Dinah-
when she was treated unjustly by the pagan nation that took her- forcefully- to
be the wife of a kings son.
The brothers meted out justice-
by tricking these pagans to get circumcised- then- while recovering ‘from
surgery’- the sons went in and wiped out the city- to their fathers dismay!
In the story- Achilles is a
warrior- who displays extreme violence- and also the human traits of a man who
acts out of selfish motives.
At one point in the war- he
removes himself from battle- because he feels his honor was betrayed.
The only thing that brings him
back is the killing of his close friend Patroclus- by Hector.
Achilles leads the Greeks to
victory- and reflects the struggle between living a long life- or dying young-
yet dying for a just cause.
One of the more famous quotes
form Homer’s Poems- attributed to Achilles- is ‘I carry 2 sorts of destiny to
the day of my death. Either, if I stay here and fight beside the city of the
Trojans, my return home is gone, but my glory shall be everlasting; but if I
return home to the beloved land of my fathers, the excellence of my glory is
gone, but there will be a long life- left for me, and my end in death will not
come to me quickly.’
There has been some debate over
the historicity of the war itself.
Some scholars believe it was Myth
[I’ll get to this in a moment].
That is- they believe the war
itself was not true- but a sort of Oral Tradition- that encompasses the reality
of the human condition- and that Homers Poems are simply mythological ways to
reveal the true condition of man.
Yet- much like the debate that
took place in the 19th century German universities- over the ‘Myth’
of the bible- later on- the rise of what we now call Archaeology [because of
the Industrial revolution- a new field arose- men started digging up the
ground- for the primary purpose of extracting materials from the earth- and at
this time we also discovered ‘lost worlds’- that is we could actually trace
cities and lands that were once deemed fake].
So- as with Homers Troy- and
bible lands- these archaeologists did indeed find Cities that matched the
stories.
In 1870 the German Archaeologist
Schliemann discovered remains that seemed to find the city of Troy- the area is
known today as modern day Turkey.
This same thing happened with the
bible- we did indeed find historical evidence that seemed to back up the
historicity of the stories we find in the bible.
As a matter of fact- a famous
doubter of the bible embarked on a search- to prove the bible was ‘myth’ yet-
after researching carefully the historical names and places we read about in
the book of Acts- he came to believe that the book of Acts- written by both an
historian and doctor [Luke] was the most historically accurate writing that
came from the first century [Acts has lots of names of political figures- court
proceedings- stuff like that- and when doing research like this- it is quite
easy to debunk the historical reality of a fake work- but- when these names and
places were researched- from actual historical records dating back to the first
century- it was amazing how the pieces fit].
The Trojan War is found in many
works of Greek literature- and art.
But the most comprehensive
account comes from Homer’s 2 poems.
Now- in Homer’s poems there are
obvious references to Mythology- Goddesses- Golden apples- the Greek gods
intervening in the affairs of men.
So yeah- we see that there are
obvious mythological aspects to the work.
Yet- the ancient Geeks did indeed
believe the war itself was a real war that took place at around the 12th
century BCE.
Some believe that Homer never
actually wrote the poems- but that he told the stories- like Oral Tradition-
and they were later written down by others.
Sort of like the classic-
Paradise Lost- by John Milton. Milton was blind- and told the story to his
daughters [oral tradition] and the actual work was penned by those who heard
it.
Jesus himself used this method-
he never wrote a book- or letter in the New Testament- yet the gospels were
compiled by his men after his death.
We read about this when Luke [who
I mentioned above] gives the reason for his documenting stuff in the book of
Acts [read Acts chapter one].
Luke also wrote his gospel a few
years after the death and resurrection of Christ.
So- some believe the same thing
happened with Homer- those who heard him tell the story multiple times- simply
put it together later on.
Most scholars believe that Homer
did indeed write the poems- and that the famous Trojan War was a real
historical event.
Last year- when in North Bergen-
my atheist friend Daniel said he watched a PBS show- and he said ‘even a priest
said the bible was Myth’.
I explained to Daniel that when
the more liberal scholars use this term [like in the writings of Bultman] that
they do not mean ‘fake’- like Greek Mythology.
But they mean that some of the
stories in the gospels might be a compilation of the many Oral teachings of
Jesus- and they were put together as one story [some think the Sermon on the
Mount was actually multiple teachings Jesus did- and they were compiled into
one event].
Now- when I explained this to
Daniel- he said ‘see- even you believe it was Myth’.
I told Daniel that no- I do not
hold to this theory [not 100%] but that I was simply telling him that even
those who use the term Myth- when talking about Theology- they do not mean
Myth- as in fake.
So- I find it interesting that both
the New testament- and Homers poems- got the same scrutiny.
In these poems we do indeed see
the condition of man- which Homer depicts as one of constant war- not peace.
James 4:2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and
cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
James 4:3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye
may consume it
[parts]
MY VIDEOS
On today’s video- I attempted the impossible- to tell the story
of ‘everything’ in 1 hour.
Ok I bit off more than I could chew.
It took 2 hours [the next video ‘history of the world- part
2’ will finish it].
But- to sum up today’s video.
Is the biblical account of creation accurate?
We read that God made everything- by speaking.
Is this even possible- or some silly fable?
Over the history of time we read the story of the Jewish
people- their trials and failures.
That’s the majority of the history of the Old Testament.
They believed the story in Genesis- while others questioned
whether or not all things actually had a beginning point.
In time- we see the rise of the Greek philosophers- during
what we call the intertestamental period [the 400 years between Malachi and
Matthew].
These thinkers were looking for the answer to these
questions- and the Greek word they used to describe this answer- was LOGOS-
which is the Geek word- for WORD.
Then we had the appearing of Christ in the 1st
century- and the apostle John calls him the LOGOS.
Hmm?
That’s the same word that the Greeks were looking for- John
says ‘we have found him’.
Remember- this is Jesus Christ- the living Word.
Ok- over time we had the great movements of history- the
Renaissance- the Reformation- the Enlightenment- the scientific revolution- the
industrial revolution.
Most scientists believed that all creation was eternal- so-
for them- the answer to ‘everything’ was- it was always there.
In the 20th century we had the great
breakthroughs of Einstein- and we call one of them the Big Bang theory-
meaning- all things did not always exist.
They had a beginning point- which we call the point of
singularity.
Ahh- now we are back to ‘where did it all come from- if at
the start- there was nothing’.
Yes- ‘In the beginning God spoke’.
So- at the end of the
story- of everything- we find the answer at the beginning.
In the beginning God spoke-Yes- the early followers of Jesus
called him by this name- THE WORD.
And science and logic
show us that all events need a cause [even the 'event’ of creation].
So- this history of the world- recorded in the scripture-
was true all along!
Surprised?
[parts]
(1332) Been doing some reading on
church history/philosophy, it’s interesting to see the role that
theology/Christianity played in the universities. Theology is referred to as
‘the queen of the sciences’ and philosophy was her ‘handmaid’. They saw the
root of all learning as originating with the study ‘of God’. Many modern
universities have dropped the term ‘theology’ and call it ‘the study of
religion’. The study of religion is really the study of how man relates to God,
his view of God; this would fit under anthropology/sociology, not under
theology. Modern learning has lost the importance of the study of God and the
role it plays in all the other sciences. The classic work of Homer [8th
century BC] called the Iliad, has Achilles debating whether or not he should
‘stay and
[parts]
WHAT’S REAL? And HOLY SAVIOR
https://youtu.be/1xlAC-2CHPw What’s
real?
I made these videos in Texas. Then didn’t have time to write the
usual teaching. So I stuck them together and did the best I could.
ON VIDEO’S- note- I mentioned on the video the philosopher who
‘doubted everything’. I wasn’t sure if I got it right. I said ‘maybe Blaise
Pascal’- but it was Renee Descartes.
.Kill Muslims?
.Bruce Jenner- 2nd thoughts?
.Little people
.He eats with sinners
.Philosophy/Physics
.Arianism
.Islam and Christianity
.Abrahams kids
.Ishmael too!
God and Allah
.Chaz Bono
.End times war?
.In defense of cops
.Hung jury
.Columbus- Aztecs- Conquistadores
PAST POSTS [verses below]
. REMINDER- This is a commentary
I wrote years ago- the videos are new.
.CHAPTER 8- FEW POINTS;
1-
Did God choose us to believe- or did we choose
him?
2-
When Paul says ‘he makes our bodies alive’ is he
only speaking about resurrection?
3-
Does God use difficulty- or is it to be rebuked?
4-
Was Paul a ‘hyper- Calvinist’?
(839)ROMAN 8:1-4 ‘There is
therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not
after the flesh [sinful nature] but after the Spirit [new nature]’. Now, having
proved the reality of sin and guilt [chapter 7] Paul teaches that those who
‘are in Christ’ are free from condemnation. Why? Because they ‘walk according
to the Spirit’ the ‘righteousness of the law is being fulfilled in them’.
Having no condemnation isn’t simply a ‘legal function’ of declared
righteousness, and Paul didn’t teach it that way! Paul is saying ‘all those who
have believed in Jesus and have been legally justified [earlier arguments in chapters
3-4] are now walking [actually acting out] this new nature. Therefore [because
you no longer walk according to the flesh] there is no condemnation’! This
argument helps bridge the gap between Catholic and Protestant theology, part of
the reason for the ongoing schism is over this understanding. After the
Reformation the Catholic Church had a Counter Reformation council, the council
of Trent. They dealt with a lot of the abuses of the Catholic Church, things
that many Catholic leaders were complaining about before the Reformation. They
did deal with some issues and reformed somewhat. To the dismay of the more
‘reform minded’ Catholics [with Protestant leanings] they still came down
strong on most pre reform doctrines. This made it next to impossible for the
schism to be healed. But one area of disagreement was over ‘legal’ versus
‘actual/experiential’ justification. The Catholic position was ‘God can’t
declare/say a person is justified until they actually are’ [experientially].
The Protestant side [Luther] said ‘God does justify [legal declaration] a
person by faith alone’. Like I taught before, both of these are true. The
Catholic view of ‘justification’ is looking ahead towards a future reality [The
same way James speaks of justification in a future sense- He uses the example
from Genesis 22, when Abraham does a righteous act] while the Protestant view
is focusing on the initial legal act of justification [Genesis 15]. Here Paul
agrees with both views, he says ‘those who walk after the Spirit [actually living
the changed life] have no condemnation’.
[parts]
[parts]
(1242) Read a few chapters from
Brian McLaren’s ‘everything must change’ thought I’d comment. I like Brian’s
writing style, I agree with him on believers needing to be challenged to see
things differently, but I disagree on some of his ‘everything’s’. He challenges
the idea of objective thinking as defined as foundationalism. He explains well
the questioning of modern intellectuals after the world wars and Holocaust of
the 20th century. He shows how certain thinkers began looking for
answers to the problem of society’s failure as seen in these events. He also
shows how some blamed the events on ‘foundationalism’ which is a way of ‘seeing
things’ [epistemology] as defined by Rene Descartes. These thinkers diagnosed
the problem as society’s acceptance of absolutes, they felt that this led to an
‘overconfidence’ in right and wrong and this in turn allowed for these
atrocities to happen. Many modern thinkers would disagree with this conclusion.
I find it interesting that Brian makes some statements about Evolution that
seem to say he accepts the theory, but yet he fails to see the role that Social
Darwinism played as a precursor to the Holocaust. You could make the opposite
argument that it was the rejection of absolutes, and the rise of liberal
theology from the universities in Germany that led to these events. Many
scholars began questioning Gods truth and laid a foundation that said ‘we
really can’t trust Gods truth’ [or even know it]. To be honest these debates
are a little philosophical and I didn’t think Brian would go down this road,
but he does so I will deal with it. Many ‘post moderns’ believe that one of the
things that must change is the ‘old’ [what is termed modern] way of thinking.
These new thinkers assert that truth itself, as an absolute thing that people
can know for sure, is out of mans reach. They question the modern way of
thinking that teaches there are certain absolutes [preconceived ways of
thinking that everyone accepts]. These new thinkers say this ‘foundationalism’
is the problem. Did the enlightenment invent this mode of objectivism? No.
Thinkers from Aristotle to Aquinas to Descartes all approached thinking this
way. It was defined more clearly during the enlightenment period. But this is a
philosophical debate that goes on in these various camps. You have had very
smart people disagree on these things. The great theologian Karl Barth would
say you are not truly educated until you can ‘affirm both sides of an argument,
accept contradictory definitions of the same thing’ many believe this would
lead to lunacy! The two greatest theoretical physicists of the last century
also disagreed on this. Neils Bohr would say that you can have two
contradictory truths about a subject, and they could both be true, Einstein
disagreed. So these things have been around for a while, many of the eastern
religions teach the same [Zen]. So I would disagree with Brian on this, but do
agree with him on the need for believers to expand their concerns from simple
‘going to heaven when I die’ concerns, to social justice concerns in the
nations. He does give some good examples along these lines.
[parts]
In the last Philosophy post I hit on the 10th-14th
century development of modern thought- today I want to jump into the 16th-18th
centuries. Like I said in a previous post- after the Renaissance and the
Reformation and the great scientific revolution- you had the world in somewhat
of a tailspin.
What I mean is for
hundreds of years people trusted in the old institutions [like the Catholic
Church] to tell them what was true or false- then with the development of all
these modern movements people began questioning stuff.
Was it good to question things? Sure. But some challenged
the very foundations of thought and knowing [called Epistemology] and went a
bit too far.
Some thinkers went
back to the thought of Plato [400 years BC] and said that the mind is
the main source of all knowledge- these were the 17th century
Rationalists.
Rationalism- as a philosophy- was an outgrowth of all the
great strides that man was making in all these other areas of life. The
Scientific Revolution totally challenged the age old beliefs of many in the
church.
Math became a sort of new ‘god’. How so? As science invented
the Microscope and Telescope- man was able for the first time to peer deeply
into the heavens- and to see deeply into the microscopic world.
As the great minds [Copernicus] showed us that the Universe
was different than what we thought [Heliocentric versus Geocentric] man was
able to do mathematical calculations and to say that a specific planet or star
[or Comet] would show up at an exact date- or spot- and Walla- it would happen
[you could look thru the Telescope and sure enough the math was right- the
object that was calculated to be there- was.]
These calculations were mathematical formulas- so math began
to be seen as the new religion in many ways.
There are even some thinkers in the modern day that still
say the only ‘real truth’ that exists is mathematical formulas. Yeah- one guy
wrote an entire book on the subject- the problem? Well- his book was not
written in math- but words.
Yes- even the extreme deniers of Objective truth do make
mistakes.
Now- what’s wrong with rationalism? Of course being rational
is okay- but the philosophy itself denied real Objective truth. Truth that
corresponds to some other ‘outside’ reality.
This form of thinking [rejecting outside reality] is called
Relativism/Subjectivism. While there is some truth to all the various fields of
thought- yet extreme Relativism denies ‘reality’ as most of us understand the
term. There was a strong resistance to
the 17th century rationalists- we call this Philosophy Empiricism.
The main thinker in this field was John Locke. Locke lived
most of his life in the 17th century- but his thought laid the
foundation for the 18th century Empiricist.
This philosophy says that the mind does indeed play a major
role in the knowledge of things- but this knowledge does not originate in the
mind [Plato] but in the ‘thing’ itself [Aristotle- remember when we covered
these men? Plato was an idealist- Ideas were more real than matter. Aristotle
was a Realist- closer to the thought of Locke].
Locke developed a theory called the Correspondence theory-
that truth that the Mind discovers corresponds to real things that actually
exist apart from the mind.
Locke was a practicing doctor- and most of the other
thinkers of the day had room to speculate about reality in a way that Locke
could not.
He lived in a real world with real patients who had real
symptoms- in a nutshell Locke had to diagnose his patients based on his
findings- he could not deny that there was a real problem- he had to have his
‘feet on the ground’ [based in reality] while engaging with his head up high.
Okay- I think we’ll end with this. Maybe you can go back and
read some of my previous posts on this subject- just to become a little more
familiar with it.
As Christians- we are not ‘required’ to know Philosophy- or
current events- or science- but it helps us engage the culture when we do
educate ourselves in these areas.
Go slow in learning [not too slow!] and try and see how the
Christian Worldview agrees with- or rejects certain aspects of these different
felids of thought.
Most Christians would reject Rationalism as a Philosophy-
because it denies real objective truth- it says truth is relative- whatever the
mind can conceive- or think- can be defined as truth [Unicorns?]
Biblical truth is based on real historic events- 1st
Corinthians chapter 15 says that if we deny the physical resurrection of Christ- a real event- then
our faith is in vain.
Christians base their faith on a real historic event- not
simply on a belief system.
[parts]
VERSES-
Acts 1:1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all
that Jesus began both to do and teach,
Acts 1:2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he
through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had
chosen:
Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by
many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the
things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them
that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the
Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be
baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of
him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the
times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is
come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all
Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld,
he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
Acts 1:10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he
went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing
up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall
so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Acts 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called
Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.
Acts 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper
room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and
Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes,
and Judas the brother of James.
Acts 1:14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and
supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his
brethren.
Acts 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the
disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and
twenty,)
Acts 1:16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been
fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning
Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
Acts 1:17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of
this ministry.
Acts 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of
iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his
bowels gushed out.
Acts 1:19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem;
insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to
say, The field of blood.
Acts 1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his
habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let
another take.
Acts 1:21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all
the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Acts 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day
that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of
his resurrection.
Acts 1:23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was
surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
Acts 1:24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the
hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
Acts 1:25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship,
from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
Acts 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon
Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
And
I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide
with you for ever;
But
the Comforter, which is
the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all
things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto
you.
But
when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he
shall testify of me:
Nevertheless
I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not
away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I
depart, I will send him unto you.
Let his days be few; and let another take hisoffice.
Yea,
mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath
lifted up his heel against me.
I
speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be
fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts-
re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on- Thanks-
John.#
No comments:
Post a Comment