Podcasts about hellenistic jewish

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biblical-studies

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/christian-studies

One orthodoxy of critical biblical scholarship on the Third Gospel, attributed by later Christian tradition to a companion of Paul named Luke, holds that its author was not ethnically Jewish but rather a Gentile of some kind, either a proselyte to Judaism, a “Godfearer” once attached to a diasporic synagogue, or perhaps a pagan convert to a form of early Christianity reverent to Israel's scriptures.  In Luke Was Not A Christian: Reading the Third Gospel and Acts within Judaism (Brill, 2024), Joshua Paul Smith addresses the consensus for the supposedly Gentile Luke and concludes that no solid New Testament or patristic evidence exists to substantiate such a claim. Moreover, Smith suggests by means of a cognitive linguistic analysis of insider and outsider terms in Luke and Acts, as well as their author's attitudes toward the Torah and intricate knowledge of Jewish festival celebrations, that these books were more likely to have been written by an individual enculturated in “a Jewish setting … among the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora” (p. 233). Smith joined the New Books Network to discuss this revision of his Ph.D. thesis, our ability to know an ancient author through their textual remains, and why it would be inappropriate to interpret Luke's full-throated embrace of the Gentile mission as an indicator of his non-Jewish identity. Joshua Paul Smith (Ph.D., University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, 2021) teaches presently at Southeast Missouri State University. His research interests include literary and cognitive approaches to New Testament texts, as well as early Jewish and Christian identity formation. He is currently working on a short book on Acts for a general audience, and conducting research for an article that applies social network analysis to named characters in Luke and Acts. Additionally, he serves as Managing Editor for Reviews of the Enoch Seminar, publishing book reviews on a wide range of topics related to the study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic origins. Rob Heaton (Ph.D., University of Denver, 2019) hosts Biblical Studies conversations for New Books in Religion and teaches New Testament, Christian origins, and early Christianity at Anderson University in Indiana. He recently authored The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata: From Popularity in Early Christianity to Exclusion from the New Testament Canon (Lexington Books, 2023). For more about Rob and his work, or to offer feedback related to this episode, please visit his website at https://www.robheaton.com.

Hebrews 6:4-6 is the most often cited text by those who seek to make a case that believers can fall away from the faith and lose their salvation. But a careful reading of the text makes it clear that the author of Hebrews does not have genuine believers in view at all.An important and essential to key to the interpretation of Hebrews 6:4-9 is to understand it in its "Jewishness." How do we interpret "fall away," "impossible," and "renew them again unto repentance" in the way the first century Hellenistic Jewish readers of the Letter to the Hebrews would have understood those phrases, as well as in the way the context defines those phrases?

Title: Called and Equipped Text: Acts 6:1-7 FCF: We often struggle submitting to leadership. Prop: Because God has established and equipped leaders to unify His church toward His will, we must submit to godly leadership. Scripture Intro: ESV [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to Acts chapter 6. In a moment we will read starting in verse 1 from the English Standard Version. You can follow in the pew bible on page 1236 or in your preferred version. We are right on the cusp of transitioning to the expansion of the church. Very soon we will see the church burst out from the walls of Jerusalem. But before we get to that, both chronologically and thematically, Luke needs to show us how the church handled a problem that truly came from within. We've seen issues arise from the church's interaction with the Jewish leadership. That isn't done yet, but the Lord has preserved them. We've also seen fake Christians attempt to lie to the Spirit of God in order to profit. In this also, the Lord guarded His church. Today, we will see a problem arise truly from within the church and we will see God deal with the issue in a subtly supernatural way. Please stand with me both out of respect for and to focus on the reading of God's Word. Transition: We have a lot to get to today. So, let's waste no time. I.) God has established and equipped officers of His church to guide it, so we must submit to godly leadership. (1-4) a. [Slide 2] 1 - Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, i. The opening statement in this section “now in these days” seems to bind it more closely to the events we completed in Acts 5. ii. Despite the Jewish leadership's antagonism and even their certainty that the Nazarian sect will die out… the opposite is proving true. They continue to grow. iii. But the more people you have, the easier it is for some to fall through the cracks. b. [Slide 3] A complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews i. We need to understand exactly what is happening here and in order to do so we need to know a little about Hebrew culture in the 1st century. ii. When Alexander the Great conquered the known world around 330 BC, he also spread Greek culture throughout the empire. Greek religion, philosophy, language, values, art and literature flourished in places that it never had before. iii. But what happens when you fill a glass half full of clear water with red Kool-Aid? Do the contents of the cup remain clear or does it start turning red? It turns doesn't it. iv. As Greek influence filled and stayed in these places, it began replacing and even superseding the culture of the native people groups. v. In Jerusalem and the surrounding area, there was a movement to prevent this and keep Hebrew culture thriving. But some Jews succumbed to the influence of Greek culture and lost their ability to speak Hebrew and Aramaic. vi. They spoke only Greek. They became… Hellenized. vii. This caused a lot of bigotry and preferential treatment among Jews. Jews that could not speak Hebrew or at least Aramaic were treated as less than Hebrew. They weren't quite Jewish. viii. Even a cursory reading through the gospels reveals a Jewish nation who prides themselves in a pure bloodline. They disdained the Samaritans for having mixed with non-Jews. Hellenized Jews were treated similarly. ix. And now it seems that this prejudice is seeping into the church. x. How specifically? c. [Slide 4] Because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. i. So, we need to understand what the daily distribution is and why widows were included in this. ii. Widows and orphans were among the neediest in their day. Women could not own property or be the sole proprietor of a business. Therefore, when their husband died their possessions would be distributed among their male family members first. iii. It would be the responsibility of the family to care for widows – but as it is today, many found ways to neglect their duties. Still others had no family to care for them. iv. The church took the initiative to care for widows among them by taking food to them each day. v. In this process, the Greek speaking Jewish Christians were not being taken meals. vi. This escalated into a complaint. Luke does not say whether or not the people brought this complaint to the apostles or if the apostles just heard about it through the grapevine. vii. In one way or another the apostles become aware of this problem. d. [Slide 5] 2 – And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, i. The apostles spring to action. They deem this compliant important enough to act on without delay. ii. They summon the full number of the disciples. iii. It is difficult to know exactly what this may mean. iv. It stretches believability to think that there would be a place in Jerusalem they would be able to gather around 7-15 thousand people together to address this issue. v. The words “full number” means a large number or a group large enough to distribute information quickly to the whole or a number able to reach some sort of decision with. vi. When we see this word in this context it has the sense of a quorum or meeting the number of people needed to do business. vii. This suggests that the church had representatives. Perhaps we see the makings here of the local assemblies and their respective Elders gathered under the direction of the apostles. viii. This seems to make the most sense. That the disciples gathered were those who were the spiritual heads and representatives of smaller bodies throughout the city of Jerusalem. ix. Notice Luke does not record any sort of discussion here. There is no debate or brainstorming session. x. The apostles speak and the representatives listen. e. [Slide 6] “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. i. The apostles establish the proper priorities of their office. ii. The thought of them giving up preaching the Word of God to make this problem go away is completely unacceptable. iii. Preaching God's Word is of absolute priority. Both teaching in homes and preaching in the temple. This must continue and they must focus on this. iv. Waiting tables or serving tables does not take our modern connotation of being a waiter or waitress. Instead, we can easily derive the meaning from the context – that they are providing food for widows. v. As noble as a task as it is to provide food to widows… the apostles recognize that preaching the Word is a greater priority. One that they cannot sacrifice. vi. THEY must preach the Word of God. vii. But rather than seeking the advice of the gathering, the apostles have already arrived at a wise solution to the problem. f. [Slide 7] 3 – Therefore brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. i. Again, the apostles tell these men how to go forward. We are not told of any discussion or voting. They simply told these representatives to do this. ii. They must choose seven men. The word used here is not Anthropos which would be more ambiguous on gender, meaning mankind. iii. The word used here is Aner, which can mean man or husband. iv. A ministry to widows seems to be a great opportunity to employ the managerial skills of women, yet the apostles chose to hand this to men. This is not a definitive proof that the office of Deacon should only be men – but it is an argument in favor of that interpretation. v. These men must be of good repute. They must have a good reputation. vi. They must be full of the Spirit – meaning they have a marked life that is easy to see the Spirit's indwelling influence in their life. vii. They must be full of wisdom too, knowing God's perspective of the world and acting in that same perspective. viii. We notice that these men's ability to carry large sacks of food or run long distances is not listed as a qualification. ix. This is most likely because these men were not the ones that were going to be delivering the food. x. In fact, the food was already being delivered. xi. They were simply bringing organization and order to an already functioning ministry that needed to be better managed and organized. g. [Slide 8] 4 – But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” i. The apostles reaffirm their devotion to the priorities that mattered most. ii. They were going to devote themselves to prayer and to the ministry of the Word. iii. These take the highest priority for the apostles. And for every church following this, we should fight to preserve these as our highest priorities. iv. One final point before we summarize what we've learned. v. Scholars disagree over whether the neglect of the Hellenistic Jewish Christian widows was intentional prejudice or accidental. 1. After weighing the evidence, it seems best to conclude that this was accidental. 2. Not that such prejudice was impossible among God's people. We saw warnings against prejudice when we studied James. 3. I conclude that it was accidental for several reasons in this text, the first of which we have already seen. 4. If this was indeed a purposeful neglect out of prejudice and bigotry, why did the apostles attempt to put a band-aid on the problem? 5. Outsourcing this issue to 7 men to deal with for them seems like a big-time cop out. 6. Furthermore, they identify the issue as waiting on tables. Serving food is the issue. But if this was intentional neglect – serving tables isn't really the issue any more, is it? 7. There is another big reason to conclude this was accidental but we'll get to that in a bit. h. [Slide 9] Summary of the Point: God has always equipped members of His Covenant community with what is necessary to lead and manage the community toward godliness and holiness. God supplied Moses, priests, the Levites, military leaders, Judges, Kings, Prophets and apostles. And God continues to supply Evangelists, Elders, and Deacons to grow, lead, and manage His people. He has not left a vacuum of leadership, nor has He refused to gift those in these positions with wisdom, compassion, mercy, humility, knowledge and holiness. The church must continue to look to godly leaders to guide and manage them toward becoming a holy community. Transition: [Slide 10 (blank)] But God not only appointed and equipped these leaders to wisely lead His church. He also equipped them through that wisdom to unify His church in the love of Christ. II.) God equips godly leaders to unify His church in the love of Christ, so we must submit to godly leadership. (5-7) a. [Slide 11] 5 – And what they said pleased the whole gathering i. The apostles' direction and leadership on this issue was recognized by the whole gathered assembly of representatives. ii. We ought not infer from this that there was some kind of vote here to accept what the apostles said as the direction they needed to go. As if the church could override the decision of the apostles. iii. Instead, the purpose of this statement speaks more to the wisdom of the apostles and the trust the rest of the church had for their leadership. In a word, this statement is about the unity of the church. iv. The church trusted her leaders and her leaders were trustworthy. v. This is the point of this comment. vi. And we should recognize the wisdom of the apostles too. vii. Out of all the things that they could have done to solve this problem, from telling the Hellenistic Jews to get over it and stop being so needy, to meeting with everyone who supplied food to find who was really to blame so they could be punished, to eliminating the ministry altogether… viii. This seems like a very, VERY wise answer to the need. b. [Slide 12] And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, i. Stephen is very obviously singled out here. ii. He is the only person in the list who has any character comments attached to him. iii. The easiest explanation for this is simple foreshadowing by Luke. He intends to relate the story of Stephen's sermon to the Sanhedrin and his subsequent martyrdom in a few short verses. iv. We can also probably assume that Stephen was something of a leader among the seven. That would not be too great a leap for us. v. Stephen appearing at the head of the list here links both the previous section of problems in the church with the next section of expansion of the church from Jerusalem. vi. When we get to Stephen's sermon in chapter 7, we'll notice quickly how he is truly a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit. He speaks as eloquently as Peter. And he speaks with passion, truth, and mercy. vii. More on Stephen next week. c. [Slide 13] And Phillip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, i. The next 5 names in the list are given without details concerning them. ii. Each name has a meaning but it is unlikely that we can derive any description of the man from the meaning of their name. iii. These 5 are all thought to be men of good reputation, who are full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom. d. [Slide 14] and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. i. The last name is the only name given any details besides Stephen. ii. The description of Nicolaus is that he is a proselyte from Antioch. iii. By Antioch, Luke no doubt refers to Antioch of Syria. It would be the closest Antioch to Jerusalem, northwest up the coast of the Mediterranean, close to present day Turkey. iv. But what is a proselyte? v. A proselyte is a general term to refer to someone who left a former life and began a new one. vi. We could replace the word with “convert”. vii. But to what was Nicolaus converted? It would not be Christianity or even the Nazarian sect of Judaism. Because that would be true of everyone in this list. viii. What Luke is showing us is… that Nicolaus was a gentile, a former pagan, who converted to Judaism. After converting to Judaism, he received Christ to continue and complete his pursuit of the Jewish faith. ix. This is an important detail for Luke to mention to us. Nicolaus is the first non-ethnic-Jew that we have seen among the members of the church. x. So far, we've seen the gospel call go to Jews in Jerusalem, Jews from all parts of the world, and now… we see the gospel call go to Jews who were not ethnically Jewish but who were religiously Jewish. Like Nicolaus. xi. Although it is not as dramatic as pagans converting straight to Christ, it is more foreshadowing that the gospel call is expanding beyond the Jews. xii. This complete list of seven men is another point in the argument that the neglect of the Greek Speaking Jewish Christian widows was accidental. 1. All seven names… are Greek names. One of them isn't even ethnically a Jew. 2. The church took seven Hellenistic Jews and put them in charge of making sure that the distribution went out to every single widow in need. 3. The Hebraic Jewish widows' needs were already being met. They needed to make sure the others were met too. 4. This is a sign that the church recognized their accidental error and sought to make sure it never happened again. e. [Slide 15] 6 – These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid hands on them. i. Even though the church was given the opportunity to choose from among themselves men to do this task, the apostles maintained the exclusive authority to approve or disapprove of their choices. ii. But the men set before them were men who had stood out among the early church as men full of wisdom and the Spirit. Men who had a good reputation. iii. So, the apostles laid their hands on them, praying over them, blessing them and commissioning them into service in their role. iv. And what was the result of this? f. [Slide 16] 7 – And the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, i. The problem was resolved without the need for the apostles to stop preaching and teaching. ii. The apostles kept holding their primary duties as primary. iii. They kept teaching and preaching God's Word and men and women continued to come to Christ. iv. But also, the integrity of the church shined forth for all to see. v. Two groups of people who notoriously held prejudices against one another, were now harmoniously dwelling and caring for one another. g. [Slide 17] And a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith. i. Let's take the back end of the verse first. ii. What does it mean to be obedient to the faith? iii. There are other expressions in the scriptures such as “obey the gospel” which sound similar to this. iv. The gospel is summarized by Paul when he states that he preached Christ crucified for sinners. v. Therefore, to obey the gospel is to live as though all that is true. 1. This must first include repentance, since we must first recognize we are sinners and forsake our sin. 2. This must then include desperate dependance on Christ who died to both take our penalty for sinning and to give us His righteous standing before God. vi. And so, what Luke means when he says they became obedient to the gospel is that many priests were converting to Christ. vii. But another question we must ask about this strange ending comment is, what is its significance? viii. It is difficult to know what Luke intends for us to see from this comment. ix. Many commentators point out that beyond Jerusalem and the aristocratic priestly line, most priests tended to be less dogmatic on the divide between the Sadducees and the Pharisees. With some commentators even speculating that many more rural priests would have favored the Pharisaical party's position. A position that seems to be easier to reconcile with the doctrines the apostles were preaching. x. They also would point out that most of these priests would be quite poor, working in some trade to earn a living waiting for their 2 weeks of service a year in the temple. xi. Thus, the comment about many priests coming to Christ is remarkable mainly because the church was a charitable organization ministering to the poor which drew the attention of the poor priests. xii. What I found dissatisfying about most commentators' understanding of this point was that they were all quite quick to leave Jerusalem to find and focus on these priests. xiii. Luke does not tell us that these priests were from outside the city. And he just got done saying that disciples continued to multiply in… JERUSALEM. xiv. Everything Luke has said about the priests up to this point has indicated a strong resistance to the teachings of the early church. And certainly, everything that follows shows a persisting resistance to its teachings. xv. I find the concept of poor priests drawn to the church because of their charity – somewhat hollow and fairly earth bound in a book that has so far focused on supernatural means to the success of the church. xvi. Therefore, I have an alternate idea of why this final comment of Luke's is significant. xvii. We remarked before that the priests were predominantly Sadducean in their outlook. xviii. I would suggest that Luke intends us to see that many of that persuasion were now converting to Christ. xix. The natural question we have is… why? Certainly, by the power of God. But why now? xx. This little comment by Luke I believe speaks to the testimony of the apostles, the Elders, the newly established Deacons, and the church as a whole. xxi. Despite the doctrinal differences between the church and the priests, the priests could find no natural reason that such a group of people could so easily set aside decades of racial prejudice to live in love with one another. xxii. No other group of Jews had ever been able or even desired to live in such love and harmony so as to solve the differences between Hebraic Jews clinging to their heritage and Hellenistic Jews who had lost or abandoned their heritage. xxiii. And now… this new sect of Judaism. This rapidly growing, miracle powered, explosive movement, has somehow solved this issue. xxiv. Such change requires supernatural intervention. Gamaliel said that if this plan or undertaking is of God, then nothing could stop it. As if he were a prophet, he foreshadows a difficulty sure to shatter the fledgling movement… and instead of racial prejudice breaking the church… it flourishes instead. xxv. Now all of a sudden, these Sadducean leaning priests are saying… “it must be of God then.” xxvi. But if Sadducean priests are coming to Christ now, how do you think that is going to go with the Sanhedrin? xxvii. More on that next week. h. [Slide 18] Summary of the Point: The second point builds on the first. Not only has God supplied and equipped His church with individuals who can lead and manage them toward holiness. But also, through wise and godly leadership, God unifies His church around the bond of the blood of Christ. Old hatreds and prejudices die. From the leadership of the church all the way down to Hellenistic Jewish widows, the love of Christ reigns. God used the unity of this diverse group of people to humble many priests and call them to Himself. And He can do the same today with you and I. Through wise and Christlike leadership, the Lord can stir up the bond of love and peace among His people. Conclusion: So, CBC, what have we learned today and how then shall we live? Let's break all this down to a doctrinal takeaway this morning. Doctrinal takeaway: [Slide 19] God appoints and equips leaders of His church to wisely guide and unify them in the love of Christ. No other organization, group, club, nation, or gathering of any kind functions this way, for no other gathering is headed up by The Lord of all Creation. His servants, though they be mere men, are graced with wisdom and calling to do His will. Elders and Deacons alike are qualified by God to provide spiritual guidance and manage potential roadblocks to ministry. This produces love and peace among the body. Which in turn, creates an entity that the world cannot ignore. An entity that even the most stubborn of hearts cannot help but marvel at. God uses such an entity to call more of His people out from the darkness into His light. We are a city on a hill shining forth into the darkness. In response to this, it is incumbent upon the church to submit to and follow their godly leadership, trusting that the Lord is equipping them to guide them into truth, eliminate issues that would prevent God's people from ministering to one another, and stir up love and peace among the body. Let me improve this doctrinal takeaway by looking at a few ways this truth impacts us today. 1.) [Slide 20] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must believe that prayer and preaching and teaching God's Word is our church's highest priority. a. The church through the course of history and certainly included in that would be the church of America, has committed themselves to do and be a great many things. b. In the state of Michigan churches are classified as charitable organizations. They do not need to apply for this status. All they must do is prove that they are an ecclesiastical organization and they are granted that status. c. Why is that? d. Simply put, the church has had a long history of solving social ills and charitably giving to those in need. e. This is a beautiful and necessary function of the church. Especially toward one another. f. We see it on full display here with the church caring for widows who are unable to care for themselves. g. But the apostles were not willing to set aside prayer and the preaching and teaching of God's Word in order to devote themselves to making sure widows were being fed. h. This reveals two things to us. i. First, it reveals that the apostles believed that they were specifically called by Christ to pass on His teachings to the church and preach the gospel to the lost. i. They were not willing to be distracted from their calling, no matter how noble a purpose it may have been. ii. They recognized the priority in their own lives that Christ had placed on them to preach and teach His commands. iii. Although they no doubt have been passing on these teaching responsibilities to others (as we will see with Stephen next week), it did not free them to do other things… for prayer and preaching and teaching God's Word was their calling. j. Second, it reveals the necessary priority of the preaching and teaching of the word of God in the church. i. As noble as a work as it was to care for widows. Pure and undefiled religion as James says. ii. Such charitable acts cannot overtake a ministry to be the sum total of their identity. iii. Churches are not primarily charitable organizations. They are centers of worship and discipleship. iv. Any church that does not place prayer and the teaching and preaching of God's Word as the highest priority– runs the risk of losing what it is to be a church. v. God's people gather to commune with Him. They do this by hearing from Him and speaking to Him. These are ordinary means by which God ministers to and grows His children. vi. That is, primarily, and necessarily, why we exist. vii. To focus our efforts, CBC, on any other task, no matter how noble, is to miss the point of what it means to be His church. 2.) [Slide 21] Refutation: “What lies must we cast down” or “What do we naturally believe, or have been taught to believe, that this passage shows is false?” I actually have two of these this morning. First, we must deny that the most qualified men to be deacons are the ones who are gifted in physical strengths and skills. a. The job set before Stephen and the rest, was one of a physical care problem. They were not teaching the scriptures to these widows. They were not going house to house raising a bible study or administering the Lord's Supper. b. Instead, their job included organizing people, their schedules, the food collection, food storage, the routes for food distribution, adding names to the list, taking names off, gathering new volunteers, volunteer training, volunteer improvement and correction, budget management for purchasing more food, and perhaps many other duties. c. If you and I were setting up qualifications for such a person, we might be tempted to establish a VERY different list of qualifications for such men. d. First, we might look exclusively for women, since many women excel at such tasks. Second, we might be looking for managerial skills, people skills, financial skills. We might look for someone who knows the city well, the back roads, the alleyways. We might look for someone who is a good business man and can get discount prices on food. e. But the apostles set the qualifications. Seven men, full of faith, wisdom, and the Holy Spirit. f. My friends, although the office of the Deacon is predominantly related to earthly matters… there is a resoundingly spiritual component to their role. g. And the fact of the matter is, no matter how well someone can do plumbing, electrical, or landscaping… they will be ill equipped to manage God's people toward love and unity if they are not godly people. h. We must forever dismiss this idea from our minds, that Deacons must be equipped with physical earth-bound skills. For that is simply not true. They must be godly. That is their qualifications. i. As we seek the Lord for the reception of more Deacons in the future, we must focus on their spiritual strength and not their physical skills. 3.) [Slide 22] Refutation: Secondly, we must deny that the best way to arrive at the right answer is by consensus. a. We notice in this text that consensus follows the solution. It does not precede it. b. The apostles stated the problem, their inability to meet it, and their instructions for solving the problem. c. And when the church leaders put forward 7 men to serve in the capacity which the apostles directed, the apostles ultimately approved and appointed the men to do the work laid out before them. d. Because of our American heritage, we naturally assume that the best way to arrive at the best solution to a problem is to come to some kind of consensus. To get in a room and discuss all our options until the best one emerges. We verify it is the best by the number of people that support it. e. How shocking to discover that the early church did not function this way. f. Some suggest that is because their society was not ready for a system of government where all have a vote to determine policy and direction. g. The problem with that is that both a democracy and a republic had existed before Jesus was born. To say that the 1st century church was unaware of these forms of government is to ignore the fact that Rome and Greece before it operated this way. h. If God desired to establish a democracy to operate His church, he needed only to point to the Greeks. If it were to operate like Republic, He needed only to point to the early days of Rome. i. Instead, the apostles, based on the wisdom and love of God, make the decisions and leave it to the church leaders to implement them. j. In this God has made it abundantly clear that it is not raw consensus that leads us to the best solutions. Instead, it is consensus among men who are qualified and called of God to lead His people. This is what leads us to the best solutions. k. That is not to say that there is no place for consensus among the people. Certainly, after the apostles put forward their solution, it pleased the community leaders. But this speaks less of the power and authority of the consensus and more of the wisdom and direction of the apostles. l. The bottom line is this… God has not given us instruction to govern our churches where the majority wins. Instead, God has called and qualified godly men to lead His people, earning trust while being trusted. m. This leads us naturally to our next application. 4.) [Slide 23] Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don't naturally do or aren't currently doing?” We must trust and submit to our godly leaders. a. The commands to submit to Elders make absolutely no sense if God has designed His church to operate as a democracy. Just as it would make no sense for a wife to submit to her husband but have an equal vote in the decision making, nor a slave to submit to his master but have an equal vote in his employment. b. This is why God has given us the qualifications for who a person must be if he is qualified to be an Elder. c. Although every man must strive for each characteristic, it is only some whom God graces to have those characteristics. God ultimately calls and equips those whom He desires to lead His church. d. It is the church's responsibility to receive, trust, and submit to their godly leaders. e. Much like a relationship of a husband to a wife – this is not without mutual trust and mutual submission. f. The apostles could have appointed the men themselves, yet they delegated and entrusted this task with the individual community leaders. g. This shows a give and take relationship between church leaders and those they lead. h. But we cannot allow the pendulum to swing too far. For it is the churches' responsibility to pray for and submit to their Leaders. i. This does not mean that they are never to be questioned or investigated. It doesn't mean that they will never be wrong. But generally speaking, the Lord will make His will known by the consensus of godly men He has called to lead. j. The church must bring complaints, issues, problems, disagreement, and concerns to the leadership… but trust God to work in and through them to arrive at the best answer for the community. k. Elders too must submit to one another. Even when they are outvoted. l. Submission is not easy… but it is a highly biblical concept. m. I can state this application not as a corrective… for I think generally speaking, despite having only had Elders leading for a year and a half, you are a fairly submissive church. n. But this application goes out for all of us. We must submit to those whom God has called and qualified to lead. 5.) [Slide 24] De-Exhortation: “What actions should we stop doing” or “What behaviors do we naturally practice that this passage tells us to stop doing?” We must not give in to knee jerk reactions when things go wrong. a. Elders, I speak to us specifically with this one. And to myself especially. i. We must resist the urge to respond impetuously on matters of difficulty within the church. ii. It is easy to see how the apostles could have over or under reacted to this issue. iii. I can see myself brow beating the Hellenists for being too soft. I can see myself desiring to find out who messed up and chew them out. I can see myself ending the ministry and counting it as lost. iv. The apostles took a path of great compassion and mercy. One that we must tread if we are to lead these wonderful saints whose souls we are caring for. v. The apostles creatively came up with a solution without dismissing or exacerbating the problem. vi. Brothers, we should aim for such a mark. vii. Let us move forward, relying on God's grace, to be as wise as they were in addressing issues that arise among our people. b. But CBC, I'll address you in this too. i. Notice the church complained. ii. The difference between a godly complaint and an ungodly complaint has to do with both the audience of your complaining and your willingness to find contentment no matter the outcome of your complaining. iii. When church members bring a complaint to other church members, family members, friends, neighbors, members of other churches, or church leaders of other churches… they complain in sin. Why? iv. Because the one to whom they complain is neither called or equipped to solve their problem. v. When church members complain even to God or their Elders but do so demanding their own way or expecting to get what they want. They complain in sin. Why? vi. Because godliness with contentment is great gain. You cannot be thankful and lacking contentment at the same time. vii. So, complain well CBC. 1. Complain only to those who can do something about it. 2. And complain with sincere, humble, and gentle hearts, not needing to have your fears and pains alleviated but desiring only to make it known to those who care for you. 6.) [Slide 25] Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” God is faithful to bless His church with growth when they strive for unity under their godly leadership. a. We see a wonderful correlation between trusting and submitting to church leadership, love, unity, and God growing His church numerically. b. While we can't break it down to a formula that is always true. We can see the correlation between a unified, submissive, love filled church and a desire from the outsider to be a part of such a community. c. What a testimony, especially in our culture, to willingly submit to and trust godly leaders. Are you telling me that won't confound the world? d. “You mean you just do what your church Elders tell you to.” e. “Yeah. I trust them. They are some of the godliest people I know.” f. “What if they screw up?” g. “They have. They admitted it and we forgave them.” h. And what a comfort to see God bless a unified church. i. It encourages and motivates us to follow suit. Let me close with a Puritan's prayer. This prayer is specifically offered on behalf of the Elders of CBC. [Slide 26 (end)] O our Lord, Let not our ministry be approved only by men, or merely win the esteem and affections of people; But do the work of grace in their hearts, call in your elect, seal and edify the regenerate ones, and command eternal blessings on their souls. Save us from self-opinion and self-seeking; Water the hearts of those who hear your Word, that seed sown in weakness may be raised in power; Cause us and those that hear us to behold you here in the light of special faith, and hereafter in the blaze of endless glory; Make our every sermon and teaching a means of grace to ourselves, and help us to experience the power of your dying love, for your blood is balm, your presence bliss, your smile heaven, your cross the place where truth and mercy meet. Look upon the doubts and discouragements of our ministry and keep us from self-importance; We beg pardon for our many sins, omissions, infirmities, as men, as ministers; Command your blessing on our weak, unworthy labours, and on the message of salvation given; Stay with your people, and may your presence be their portion and ours. When we preach and teach to others let not our words be merely elegant and masterly, our reasoning polished and refined, our performance powerful and tasteful, but may we exalt you and humble sinners. O Lord of power and grace, all hearts are in your hands, all events at your disposal, set the seal of your almighty will upon our ministry. In Jesus Name we pray… Amen.

The O'Leary Review Podcast Guest: Laura Davidson Show Notes available: https://briandoleary.substack.com/p/the-logic-of-freedom-understanding?sd=pf   Laura Davidson – Bio Laura Davidson is an accomplished author, researcher, and multi-disciplinary thinker who has established herself as an influential figure in the fields of economics, philosophy, and libertarian ethics. Her work, which is characterized by a rigorous approach to complex issues, has been published in numerous peer-reviewed journals. Davidson is a recipient of the prestigious Lawrence Fertig prize in economics from the Ludwig von Mises Institute, which recognizes her outstanding contribution to the field of economics in the Austrian tradition. In addition to her writing, she is a frequent speaker at libertarian and economic research conferences, as well as other venues, where her presentations have been praised for their clarity and originality. Davidson is a graduate of Oxford University, where she studied earth science and developed an understanding of the natural world and its complexities. Her intellectual curiosity subsequently led to an interest in the social sciences. Through her recent research and writing, she seeks to promote a more integrated and holistic understanding of the world we live in, one that takes account of both the natural and social dimensions of human experience. While stressing that the social and natural sciences employ very different methodologies, she realizes that they can inform and enrich each other through a shared commitment to logical reasoning. Her work has received widespread recognition, and she continues to be a prominent voice in the ongoing conversation about the intersection of science, philosophy, and economics.   About The Logic of Freedom What does it mean to be truly free? In this bold and ground-breaking exploration of human freedom, libertarian philosopher Laura Davidson challenges us to contemplate the true nature of liberty. In doing so, she leads us to question many things we may think we know about the human condition and the world around us. Genuine freedom starts with an understanding we have freedom of the will. And yet many present-day scientists and philosophers argue that free will is merely an illusion. Their claim is that the activity of the brain is a purely physical process, analogous to the operation of a computer. But this implies we are mere automatons and cannot be held morally responsible for what we do. Moreover, if human thought and action is strictly deterministic, then this seriously challenges the notion of a genuinely free society by legitimizing the initiation of force and threat of force, particularly by those in positions of power. This book strongly disagrees with determinism and tackles it head-on. Drawing from studies in consciousness and the philosophy of mind, Davidson presents a logical argument to demonstrate why the human will is inherently free. While acknowledging that our choices are clearly influenced by certain biological instincts, many of which we have inherited from our evolutionary past, she employs fresh insights to show why we alone are the final arbiters of how we act. Unlike animals, which possess a lower form of consciousness, our decisions are not made for us. Her innovative and original ideas are a breakthrough in the discourse on free will, bringing a new perspective to the age-old question of whether or not human beings have real agency. However, while most people employ their will to cooperate with others, some individuals choose to dominate with force in order to attain power and, under certain conditions, are able to manipulate the masses in a way that leads to tyranny. A crucial aspect of Davidson's argument is that political control of any kind, including all forms of force and coercion, is inconsistent with our humanity as free and rational beings and with life itself. She demonstrates why a genuinely free society is mankind's natural destiny and argues that it can ultimately be achieved. Nevertheless, true political freedom of this kind will only occur when the libertarian principle of nonaggression is strictly observed in all areas of life. She reaches startling and thought-provoking conclusions on the relationship between law, personal morality, and society, challenging some of the most basic foundations of modern polity, and ends with addressing perhaps the most important issue of all: the nature of absolute truth, and how an understanding of such truth leads to genuine freedom and happiness.   Laura's Links The Logic of Freedom: Free Will, Human Nature, and the Rational Argument for a Genuinely Free World Laura at the Mises Institute   Podcasts mentioned The Tom Woods Show – Ep 2308 w/ Laura Davidson   Books and Authors Mentioned Go to BrianDOLeary.com/bookclub for more… H.L. Mencken Origins of Totalitarianism by Hanna Arendt The Psychology of Totalitarianism by Mattias Desmet Thomas Hobbes Jordan Peterson – 12 Rules for Life St. Thomas Aquinas   Principle of non-aggression Aggression – initiation of force against persons or property The principle asserts that aggression is inherently illegitimate. This non-aggression principle (The “NAP”) is the basis of most libertarian theory, stemming from John Locke's idea of self-ownership.   Mencken quote mentioned (June 1923) From A Mencken Chrestomathy (p. 354) “There was a time, and it was much less than a century ago, when any man of sound sense and fair education could understand all of the concepts commonly employed in the physical sciences, and even most of those used in the speculative sciences. In medicine, for example, there was nothing beyond the comprehension of the average intelligent layman. But of late that has ceased to be true, to the great damage of the popular respect for knowledge. Only too often, when a physician of today tries to explain to his patient what is the matter with him, he finds it impossible to get the explanation into terms within the patient's understanding. The latter, if he is intelligent enough, will face the fact of his lack of training without rancor, and content himself with whatever parts of the exposition he can grasp. But that sort of intelligence, unluckily, is rather rare in the world; it is confined, indeed, to men of the sort who are said to have the scientific mind, i.e., a very small minority of men. The average man, finding himself getting beyond his depth, instantly concludes that what lies beyond is simply nonsense.”   Benjamin Franklin Franklin famously said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Or did he? Or did he mean what we think he said? Benjamin Wittes, writing at Lawfare says: “Very few people who quote these words, however, have any idea where they come from or what Franklin was really saying when he wrote them. That's not altogether surprising, since they are far more often quoted than explained, and the context in which they arose was a political battle of limited resonance to modern readers. Many of Franklin's biographers don't quote them at all, and no text I have found attempts seriously to explain them in context. The result is to get to the bottom of what they meant to Franklin, one has to dig into sources from the 1750s, with the secondary biographical literature giving only a framework guide to the dispute.” More at Lawfare   What is Virtue? The concept as described by Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) in Rhetoric: “The forms of Virtue are justice, courage, temperance, magnificence, magnanimity, liberality, gentleness, prudence, wisdom.” — Rhetoric 1366b1 Philo of Alexandria (c. 50 BC – c. 50 AD), a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, says: “In these words Moses intends to sketch out the particular virtues. And they also are four in number, prudence, temperance, courage, and justice.” — Philo's Works, Allegorical Interpretation XIX   The Roman philosophy as described by Cicero (106-43 BC): “Virtue may be defined as a habit of mind (animi) in harmony with reason and the order of nature. It has four parts: wisdom (prudentiam), justice, courage, temperance.” — De Inventione, II, LIII   Eudaimonia Also spelled eudaemonia or eudemonia. Laura defines it roughly as “human flourishing.” According to Aristotle, it was the term for the highest human good. “Verbally there is a very general agreement; for both the general run of men and people of superior refinement say that it is [eudaimonia], and identify living well and faring well with being happy; but with regard to what [eudaimonia] is they differ, and the many do not give the same account as the wise. For the former think it is some plain and obvious thing like pleasure, wealth or honour...” —   Nicomachean Ethics   Tom Woods 100 One of the goals of this program is to get at least 100 people within the Tom Woods orbit on the podcast. “Tom's orbit” is loosely defined, but we have somewhere around 80 more to go. Laura is a fellow member of the Tom Woods School of Life. WhoIsInTheTomWoodsWorld.com — A page with all my #TomWoods100 conversations.     Fountain.FM Listen and support us at the same time over at Fountain.FM “Fountain is the only place where listeners and podcasters get rewarded for the value they provide for others.” Fountain is powered by the Bitcoin Lightning Network, “the payment system which allows us to transact with other people or businesses around the world using Bitcoin - the world's first and leading cryptocurrency.”   We've created a resource page for Laura and her work at briandoleary.com/lauradavidson     Go to BrianDOLeary.com for more information.    

Listen along as we look at the letter from James to the church. Notes/Quotes: James 1:1-28  - Mike Reading In a word St. John's Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul's epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter's first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James' epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it. - Martin Luther Mark 3:20-21 John 7:1-5  Acts 1:14 “In English, perfect means “without blemish.” What this word (perfect) means is: whole, to be complete, be consistent, like an integer, which is related to integrity. It speaks of maturity…All the ethics of the Bible are imitative, because this is what God is like.” - Jonathan Pennington “In rapid-fire sequence, James: • encourages his readers to respond positively to their trials (1:2–4); • exhorts them to ask in faith for wisdom (1:5–8); • comforts the poor and warns the rich (1:9–11); • pronounces a blessing on Christians who endure trials (1:12); • warns believers not to blame God for temptations (1:13–15); • reminds his readers that all good gifts, including the new birth, come from God (1:16–18); • warns his readers about sins of speech (1:19–20); • exhorts believers to be obedient to the word they have received (1:21–25); • and reminds them of the essence of “true religion” (1:26–27). Wordplays, evident in the Greek text but usually not in the English, forge literary links between many of these sections: • chairein (“greetings”) in v. 4b is picked up by charan (“joy”) in v. 2 • leipomenoi (“lacking”) in v. 4b is picked up by leipetai (“lacks”) in v. 5 • peirasmon (“trial”) in v. 12 is picked up by peirazomenos (“when tempted”) in v. 13 • Note also that teleios (“perfect,” “complete”) occurs in vv. 4, 17, and 25." Douglas Moo “I am more impressed than ever by James's creative use of Hellenistic Jewish traditions in his exposition of practical Christianity. And I remain convinced that the heart of the letter is a call to wholehearted commitment to Christ. James's call for consistent and uncompromising Christian living is much needed. Our churches are filled with believers who are only halfhearted in their faith and, as a result, leave large areas of their lives virtually untouched by genuine Christian values. Nor am I immune to such problems. As I quite unexpectedly find myself in my “middle age” years, I have discovered a tendency to back off in my fervor for the Lord and his work. My re-immersion in James has challenged me sharply at just this point.”  Douglas Moo  

The early apostles were extremely aware of the limitations imposed by their calling. They resolved to ‘stick to their assignment' of prayer and preaching. The church leaders argued, “It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables” (Acts 6.2). The congregation would select deacons to ensure fair treatment of widows among the Hellenistic Jewish converts in the daily rationing of food. As for the apostles, they would limit themselves to their “assigned tasks of prayer and speaking God's Word.” Should every follower of Christ strive for an apostolic expression of faith and focus exclusively on prayer and preaching? Not at all. Each person of faith is charged with the responsibility of discovering God's specific will and must stick to the “assigned tasks,” whatever those may be.

Philo of Alexandria, (20 BCE – c.  50 CE), also called Philo Judaeus, was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher who lived in Alexandria, in the Roman province of Egypt. Many of his works are survived to us through the Church, such as his writings on the Trinity, the Logos, and other Hellenistic Jewish ideas that influenced early Christianity. Jim Majors, Ph.D Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheJimMajorsJim Majors on Youtube: @Jim Majors #JimMajors #Philo #Logos #Gnostic #GnosticInformant --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/gnosticinformant/message

In this episode, we continue our discussion of Gideon/Jerubaal's military successes and the proposal which offered Gideon the chance to become the first King of the Jews. We then discuss Gideon's son Abimelech who unjustly tried to take the role offered to his father, and ended up massacring the people of Schechem. Afterwards, we discuss the judge Tola son of Puah focusing on different ideas derived from his name and his associated with the Tribe of Issachar. Finally, we discuss Jair the Gileadite and the Hellenistic Jewish tradition that brands him an idolater.

Acts 7, Rev. Aaron Eime tells us, has often been used by skeptics as an argument against the integrity of Scripture, who cite the many inconsistencies and disparities of Stephen's speech before the Sadducees. Stephen, as described in Acts 6, is full of the Holy Spirit and a worker of miracles and signs. Little more is known of Stephen except that he is a Greek speaker from the Hellenistic Jewish community. He reads and quotes from the Septuagint Greek Bible, which explains the differences in quotes from the Old Testament. Stephen's speech is given during a high pressure situation in which charges of blasphemy against the Torah and the Temple have been brought against him. This is his chance to defend himself, he does so by going on the offensive. Notes for this study can be found at http://www.christchurchjerusalem.org/sermons/study-acts-of-the-holy-spirit/ Blessed by our teachings? Consider saying thank you with a small (or large) donation. www.christchurchjerusalem.org/donate/

Justin Rogers guides us on a tour of the afterlife of Philo's work. How did the great Hellenistic Jewish thinker become a father of the Christian faith (and of Christian esoteric scriptural hermeneutics in particular)? We find out.

At this point, we are introduced to one of the seven, Stephen, who is the main subject of the remainder of this chapter and the next. We are drawn to Stephen’s example because he was full of the Holy Spirit and totally committed to the Gospel. Stephen’s ministry is similar to the ministry of the Apostles. He engages in effective witness by word and action in the power of the Spirit (5:12, 42). Stephen performs great wonders and signs among the people by God’s grace and power (6:8). But he also preaches effectively and powerfully.Stephen's witness in the Hellenistic Jewish synagogues drew immediate opposition. The teaching of Jesus had also drawn opposition and he predicted those who followed him would also face opposition and persecution. Those who challenged Stephen in theological debate had no answer for him and so no-one could stand against him (6:10). Despite winning the debate, those who challenged Stephen did not respond with repentance and accept the good news by faith. This was not a reflection of Stephen’s ministry, but rather a matter between them and God. They would, in fact, continue to plot against him.For our own ministries to be effective, we must also operate by God’s grace and power being filled with God’s Spirit. It is tempting to try to minister in our own strength; however, if we do this, our efforts will not bear fruit. At the same time, we must be aware that people do not always respond to the Gospel when it is presented to them, and our attempts to share the Gospel may result in conflict and persecution. DRQuestionsThink about times when you have ministered in God’s strength and in your own strength. Reflect on the differences.Have you faced opposition/persecution as a result of sharing the Gospel? If yes, how did you respond? If you haven’t, how would you respond?PrayerAlmighty Father, we thank you for calling us, equipping us, and empowering us for the work of mission. Help us to minister by your grace and power, and not by our own strength or understanding. Sustain us in the face of opposition and persecution. Amen.


The suggested appointment of seven men to meet the pastoral needs of the growing congregation was accepted by the whole congregation, meaning that the Hebraic group and the Hellenistic group were in agreement. Even though the Twelve did not specify from which group the seven should be selected, all seven names were Greek: Stephen, Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas (6:5). It seems that the congregation decided that the widows should be ministered by those from their own cultural group. Given the differences between the two groups, this decision showed respect for the needs of the Hellenistic Jewish widows.The group of seven were brought to the Twelve who commissioned them for their ministry by praying for them and laying hands on them (6:6). The Twelve did not pray for them to be filled with the Spirit because being filled with the Spirit was a requirement for their selection in the first place. Instead, the Twelve authorised these seven men to engage in this important ministry on behalf of the Twelve and the congregation as a whole. If this issue had not been dealt with quickly and completely, there was the potential for the congregation to be torn apart. Instead, the word of God spread, there was rapid growth in the number of disciples in Jerusalem and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith (6:7). Unity was central to the spread of the Gospel.We must also seek to preserve unity within our own congregation seeking to meet the pastoral needs of all members. DRQuestionsReflect on the ministry to which you have been called and your commissioning for this ministry (if this has occurred). Think about the ways your ministry contributes to the life of the congregation.How does the degree of unity which exists amongst the churches in Toowoomba help the spread of the Gospel in this region?PrayerLoving God, help us to be a unified church under the perfect headship of Christ. Help us to recognise your calling on our lives, and exercise our ministry with wisdom and in the power of your Spirit. Amen.


As the early church grew in numbers, a problem arose which threatened church unity and future growth. The Hellenistic Jewish widows were not receiving assistance in the form of daily food distribution while the Hebraic Jewish widows were. This may have been caused by language and cultural differences or the distance that the Hellenistic widows lived from the rest of the congregation. Whatever the cause of the issue, and it was probably not deliberate, widows were extremely vulnerable because they could not, in most cases, support themselves and relied on external help to survive.The Twelve instructed the congregation to choose seven men to take over this responsibility, while the Twelve would concentrate on prayer and the ministry of the word. These seven needed to be full of the Spirit and wisdom (6:3). The decision-making process reflects important values for church order. The process was open and transparent as all the congregation were invited and attended the gathering. It was participatory, the congregation chose the seven while the Twelve would authorise them to minister, giving distinct roles for leaders and congregation. The proposed solution reveals the values that guided the decision: commitment to unity, to a holistic ministry and to growth by means of preaching and teaching. Unity is maintained by ensuring that all widows were treated equally. Luke stresses that this social ministry has equal validity with the apostles' ministry of prayer and teaching, for he uses diakonia to describe both. The church must exercise both, and neither to the exclusion of the other.We are reminded of the importance of pastoral care, prayer and the teaching of God’s word for the health, unity and growth of our congregation, and that these tasks may be shared amongst us so that no ministry is neglected. DRQuestionsHow does St Bart’s care for the vulnerable and empower its leaders?Why is prayer and the ministry of the Word so important for church growth?PrayerLord of all, as we seek to make disciples of Jesus Christ, make us mindful of the needs of the vulnerable in our midst. Help our leaders to ground the ministry of St Bart’s in prayer, and to be faithful in the teaching of your Word. Amen.