|
Acts 1
Jan 26, 2009 23:13:37 GMT -5
Post by Scott Ross on Jan 26, 2009 23:13:37 GMT -5
I'm going to just open this up with Acts chapter 1. Feel free to post what any of you get from this chapter. Scott
|
|
|
Acts 1
Jan 30, 2009 13:41:29 GMT -5
Post by Scott Ross on Jan 30, 2009 13:41:29 GMT -5
I thought that it would be good to have some background on the book of Acts. The following is from: www.answers.com/topic/acts-of-the-apostles Bible Guide: Acts of the Apostles
The second part of a two-part history of the early church, traditionally by the author of the Gospel of Luke. Luke-Acts comprises the largest amount of material supplied by a single author in the NT.Several indications point to the probability that Acts was in fact written by the same person who wrote Luke: (a) the prologues to both are addressed to one Theophilus, and Acts 1:1 indicates that it is a continuation of the previous work; (b) there is a marked unity of language and style; (c) numerous parallels in author’s focus exist between the two books (for example, an emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit or the role played by women).
Scholars are almost universally agreed that the two books originally made up a literary unit.The name of the author is not given in the text. From considerations of convenience and convention he may be called Luke, though the book was not associated with him before the latter part of the 2nd century A.D. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III 13, 3). The author was an eyewitness of and participant in some of the events described in the latter part of the book. These are the famous “we passages” (16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1-28:16), in which events are described in the first person. Here the narrative reads as if it had been taken from a personal diary. These passages indicate that the author was closely associated with Paul, and this is borne out by the fact that the bulk of Acts deals with the evangelizing efforts of Paul.
The events described come to an abrupt end with Paul’s arrival in Rome and subsequent two-year stay there, i.e., about A.D. 60. While this is a reasonably accurate starting point, estimates have varied widely as to the actual date of composition, ranging from Harnack’s A.D. 63-64 to as late as A.D. 150 (when it was clearly used by Marcion). There are indications that Acts may have been known by Clement of Rome, and this would give us a latest date of 95. Attempts to narrow down the date of composition further are necessarily based on arguments of omission. So, for example, Acts does not mention a journey by Paul to Spain (cf Rom 15:24, 28) nor Nero’s persecution and Paul’s death c.64.
Considering that Acts was composed after Luke’s gospel, the dating of the latter relative to the destruction of the Temple in 70 comes into the picture. If passage like Luke 19:41-44 and 21:20ff be taken as evidence of a post-70 composition of Luke, then Acts must also be later. Thus Acts is commonly dated between A.D. 80 and 90.Although the place of writing cannot be determined from internal evidence (unless, of course, it was written soon after the last events described in Rome), one tradition assigns it to the capital of the Empire. Other sites mentioned are Achaia, Ephesus and Antioch.Acts is a unique contemporary account of the history of the early church, and no similar narrative has survived.
The book serves as a vital sequel to the story of the life of Jesus and a transition to the letters written by leaders of the movement he left behind. From these letters, especially those of Paul, it would have been possible to reconstruct some of that history, but it would have been a reconstruction lacking in broad areas of information. As it is, the narrowed focus of Luke leaves much that is unexplained. Nowhere does he tell us how the gospel was taken to Egypt or eastwards into Syria nor, for that matter, to Rome itself. Indeed, he gives us no report of the progress of the church in an area as close and important as Galilee. Luke’s focus is exclusively on two individuals, Peter and Paul, and others (with the exception of Stephen in chapters 6 and 7) are mentioned only as they incidentally cross the paths of these two.Acts may conveniently be broken down on the basis of its treatment of Peter and Paul.
With the noted exception of Stephen’s chapters, Peter figures prominently in the first 12 chapters. He is clearly the spokesman, the leader, and the dominant figure; this is consistent with Luke’s earlier recorded words of Jesus (Luke 22:31-32) that he had selected Peter for just such a role. From chapter 13 on, the focus shifts entirely to Paul and Acts necessarily becomes a kind of travelogue as Paul embarks on a succession of “missionary journeys”.Another way of understanding the progression of the book is best set out in 1:8: “you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth.” Luke is relating the story of the spread of the gospel, starting from Jerusalem and finally arriving in Rome.
It is a story of men bearing testimony. Chapters 1-7 take place in Jerusalem, chapter 8 in Samaria; chapter 9 moves momentarily to a community of believers in Syria and then tells of the gospel’s spread in other parts of Judea. With the gospel being taken to the Gentiles in chapter 10, the stage is set for expansion into the surrounding countries in the remaining chapters.
At least two threads may be seen as running through the book in the preaching of the apostles. First and foremost is the message of Jesus’ death and resurrection. According to Luke’s account (seconded by Paul’s letters) the apostolic preaching placed surprisingly little emphasis on the teachings of Jesus. The message of the of was straight and simple: “God anointed him … they put him to death… God raised him up” (10:38-40; cf 2:22-24; 3:15; 5:30; 13:23, 28-30; 17:3, 31).
The second thread is the emphasis on the Holy Spirit as the motivating, guiding force in the young community. Until Paul’s arrest in chapter 22, the Holy Spirit figures in no less than 16 chapters, and it is for this reason that some commentators have suggested that the book might be called “The Acts of the Holy Spirit”.Finally, the book of Acts describes the onset of the process by which the fledgling church found itself increasingly separated from Judaism. It was a gradual development and certainly not an obviously necessary outcome from the beginning. The earliest of (variously called “the brethren”, “the way”, “the disciples”, “Nazarenes”) was in fact just one of several Jewish sects. As long as they refrained from proselytizing activities among members of other sects, they seem to have lived peacefully in Palestine among their Jewish brothers.
The 27-year period of events in Palestine depicted in Acts records only five instances of conflicts between the church and their fellow Jews (4:1ff; 5:17ff; 6:9-8:3; 12:1ff; 21:27ff). Outside of the land, Paul’s aggressive preaching met with opposition from some zealots (e.g., 13:45ff; 17:5, 13), and on these occasions Paul usually vowed to take his message to the Gentiles. But Luke faithfully records that wherever Paul went, he invariably chose the synagogue as the first place he preached. The book ends with Paul in the capital of the empire, preaching the gospel there.
This seemed to be a pretty good description of what was going on in the book of Acts. I am always interested reading some of the information regarding the settings of the different books in the bible. Scott
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Acts 1
Feb 1, 2009 5:42:55 GMT -5
Post by shushy on Feb 1, 2009 5:42:55 GMT -5
Why do you think Lukes focus was on these two men primarily? Peter and Paul.
The word Acts denotes action/activity. Its over 10 yrs since I studied this book. THe first verses are so impacting and powerful. Jesus v3, showing himself and revealing many proofs of his resurrection to comfort them and assure them he was alive. 40days is a long time to speak about the kingdom of God. Then being told "to wait" for the gift, the comforter to be baptised with the Holy Spirit. This seemed of vital importance. I know personally it changed my christian life/walk. If it was important then why not now? I cant find a valid reason. I believe this is for every christian. Waiting for God: There are a number of scriptures Isaiah 25:9, Psl 37:7, "Be still before the Lord and wait patiently for him, do not fret when men succeed in their ways, when they carry out their wicked schemes." Psl 40:1, "I waited patiently for the Lord he turned to me and heard my cry" Isaiah 26:8, "Yes, Lord walking in the way of your laws, we wait for you, your name and renown are the desire of our hearts." Isaiah 32:2, " O Lord be gracious to us, we long for you, be our strength every morning our salvation in times of distress. Im sure the Apostles were only to happy to wait.
Divine delays test faith, try mens courage .... Psl 13:1, 69:3, 119:82, Jn11:6, Jas 5:7, " Be patient then brothers, until the Lords coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to yeild its valuable crops and how patient he is for the autumn and spring rains." 2 Peter 3:9, " The Lord is not slow in keeping his promises as some understand slowness. He is pateint with you not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentence.
Im asking why it took so long for the Holy Spirit to come. Was it just because Jesus had to return to heaven first. I've heard it preached that Jesus Christ alone on earth could not do what the holy spirit present everywhere can do .It was about receiving power. My margin calls it spiritual equipment, Ive called it spiritual tools. They saw Jesus taken up and then the two angels speaking to them of him returning the same way.
|
|
|
Acts 1
May 6, 2018 15:54:42 GMT -5
Post by intelchips on May 6, 2018 15:54:42 GMT -5
Well, This is interesting on many levels. Only one reply to the original post in 9 years. What an interesting concept to actual study The Bible! That is to say, not study the word of god but actually The Bible. Is Scott Ross still around or did some of you take him out and tar and feather him?
|
|
|
Acts 1
May 7, 2018 17:44:20 GMT -5
Post by snow on May 7, 2018 17:44:20 GMT -5
Well, This is interesting on many levels. Only one reply to the original post in 9 years. What an interesting concept to actual study The Bible! That is to say, not study the word of god but actually The Bible. Is Scott Ross still around or did some of you take him out and tar and feather him? No he's still around. He's one of the mods here I believe.
|
|
|
Acts 1
May 11, 2018 13:10:18 GMT -5
Post by Scott Ross on May 11, 2018 13:10:18 GMT -5
Well, This is interesting on many levels. Only one reply to the original post in 9 years. What an interesting concept to actual study The Bible! That is to say, not study the word of god but actually The Bible. Is Scott Ross still around or did some of you take him out and tar and feather him? We have left this section of the TMB here in case there is any renewed interest in studying scripture. Nope. I didn't get tarred and feathered. I did however get saddled with other issues regarding the WINGS group. I have been rode hard and put away wet on several occasions because of that. Probably would have been more enjoyable to be tarred and feathered.......
|
|
|
Post by Dennis J on May 11, 2018 14:49:46 GMT -5
Scott, you just expressed some feelings I also have in posting. I chose to believe/not believe, as well as where I have erred, to my shame. This thread and forum, is like a preacher preaching to a choir of believers, much as 2&2 preachers speak now basically to those agreeing with them, no matter what is expressed.
Since there are at least four groups posting to this forum, and for me, this combined group no longer, if it ever was, is composed only of those who present themselves as Godly, according to Psalms 1, there is little reason for me to think “Blessing” either will, or even can be, found here. Yes, I find that sad, very sad.
Nonetheless, as I am far from being Godly, myself, and I have been cut off from the root to which I was indoctrinated as being Godly from my very conception, with no way to return except by admitting to guilt where I had none.... what is there left to say/express?
I willingly accept where I am or have been wrong. Forgiveness, not grace, is obtainable by the formula left in Biblical record. Grace is that wonderful gift from my God which, only by extending freely to others, can I know its true value to me and for my soul.
|
|
|
Acts 1
May 11, 2018 20:36:50 GMT -5
Post by CherieKropp on May 11, 2018 20:36:50 GMT -5
May I suggest this board be renamed something broader like: Bible study, questions and thoughts; or Scripture comments & discussions.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Oct 28, 2018 13:49:03 GMT -5
Cherie
If one is to study the Bible then that means to dig deep into who, what, and why. While most people use the term Bible Study to mean going along with the party line. To actually study the Bible means searching though extra-biblical sources.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Oct 28, 2018 18:36:07 GMT -5
I agree.
|
|