Read Galatians 3:1-25
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3:1-25
In Galatians 3:2-14, Paul showed that the promises of God came not from works of the Law, but through faith. He reminds them that they received the Spirit of God because the believed what they had heard and the work begun in them by the Holy Spirit can not be finished by their own efforts. Even Abraham’s belief was credited to him as righteousness. Our faith in Christ redeemed us from relying upon the Law so we could receive the promise of the Spirit.
In Galatians 3:15-25, we see that the promise made to Abraham was not nullified when the Law was presented 430 years later. The Law was given because of transgressions until the Seed, Christ Jesus, came. The Law, unable to impart life, worked to show that everyone was a sinner. This was needed so that what was promised might be given to those with faith in Christ. Rather than being opposed to the God’s promises, the Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ so we could be justified and freed from the Law’s guidance
What in this chapter spoke to you?
Have you experienced legalism in the church? How did that make you feel?
Personal reflection
On a scale of 1 to 10 how would you rate your faith number this past week? Where do you need to have more faith in your life?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Week 2 Day 3
Read Galatians Chapter 2
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=NIV
Paul’s defense of his apostleship continues from chapter 1 with a survey of his relationship with the 12 Apostles. This picks up a theme introduced in 1:1. Paul was commissioned directly by God, not “through” men. Thus, he has always met and dealt with the Twelve as equals rather than as a subordinate!
When Paul went up to Jerusalem to participate in the Acts 15 Jerusalem council, which discussed whether Gentile Christians should be commanded to keep Old Testament Law, Paul stood up for the “truth of the Gospel” of grace (2:1–5). And his position was affirmed by the church’s Jewish “pillars”! They accepted Paul fully and praised his ministry to the Gentiles without modifying his message in any way (vv. 6–10). Later, when Peter himself hesitated to identify himself fully with Gentile converts because he feared the opinion of some Jewish believers, Paul openly rebuked him. Peter’s withdrawal from the Gentiles was inconsistent with the Gospel’s basic principles of justification by faith rather than law. It was not enough for Peter to teach the Gospel. He must practice it (vv. 11–16). Nothing must be allowed to confuse the wonderful truth that the Christian life is Christ alive in us, the true and only source of righteousness (vv. 17–21)
There are two areas that I feel we should take a look at today; verse 16 and 20. What does it mean to be Justified? What does Paul mean when he says “Christ lives in me.?
Justified by faith for me means that we are saved and made righteous through our belief in Christ, that he died for us on the cross and was resurrected from the dead. John Wesley said that “ We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort.” Wesley also believe as does the UMC that once we are Justified we must have a life long journey of Sanctification, which is a big part of what we do with “Christ lives in me.”
What does Christ lives in me mean to YOU? Throughout Paul’s letters he also refers as, “in Christ, of Christ, with Christ and through Christ.” How do we live this out in our lives?
Is there a verse in this chapter that speaks to you? Why?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=NIV
Paul’s defense of his apostleship continues from chapter 1 with a survey of his relationship with the 12 Apostles. This picks up a theme introduced in 1:1. Paul was commissioned directly by God, not “through” men. Thus, he has always met and dealt with the Twelve as equals rather than as a subordinate!
When Paul went up to Jerusalem to participate in the Acts 15 Jerusalem council, which discussed whether Gentile Christians should be commanded to keep Old Testament Law, Paul stood up for the “truth of the Gospel” of grace (2:1–5). And his position was affirmed by the church’s Jewish “pillars”! They accepted Paul fully and praised his ministry to the Gentiles without modifying his message in any way (vv. 6–10). Later, when Peter himself hesitated to identify himself fully with Gentile converts because he feared the opinion of some Jewish believers, Paul openly rebuked him. Peter’s withdrawal from the Gentiles was inconsistent with the Gospel’s basic principles of justification by faith rather than law. It was not enough for Peter to teach the Gospel. He must practice it (vv. 11–16). Nothing must be allowed to confuse the wonderful truth that the Christian life is Christ alive in us, the true and only source of righteousness (vv. 17–21)
There are two areas that I feel we should take a look at today; verse 16 and 20. What does it mean to be Justified? What does Paul mean when he says “Christ lives in me.?
Justified by faith for me means that we are saved and made righteous through our belief in Christ, that he died for us on the cross and was resurrected from the dead. John Wesley said that “ We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort.” Wesley also believe as does the UMC that once we are Justified we must have a life long journey of Sanctification, which is a big part of what we do with “Christ lives in me.”
What does Christ lives in me mean to YOU? Throughout Paul’s letters he also refers as, “in Christ, of Christ, with Christ and through Christ.” How do we live this out in our lives?
Is there a verse in this chapter that speaks to you? Why?
Monday, September 28, 2009
Week 2 Day 2
Read Galatians 1
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1&version=NIV
Paul identifies himself as an apostle sent by Jesus and God as he begins this critical letter (1:1–2). After wishing the churches grace and peace (vv. 3–5), Paul expresses amazement that they have turned so quickly to a “different gospel”—one which is a perversion of the truth Paul teaches (vv. 6–9).
Because the strategy of those carrying this “different gospel” features a personal attack on Paul, the great missionary feels compelled to defend his apostleship. This defense is begun here and carried on through chapter 2. Paul has been accused of making the Gospel “easy” to please men: Does his condemnation of those bringing the “other” gospel sound wishy–washy? (v. 10) Paul has been accused of distorting the true Gospel. But he received his Gospel directly from Jesus rather than from men! (v. 11) After Paul’s conversion he did not even consult with the other apostles, but went off on his own to study (vv. 12–17). It was years before he even saw Peter and James and then they praised God for Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles (vv. 18–24). The inescapable conclusion is that the innuendos and attacks on Paul’s credibility are simply not true!
Discussion questions
What do you think the key verse of this chapter is? Why?
Paul made a point to say in verse 12 that he received his revelation Jesus Christ not man. Why do you think he makes this point?
For personal reflection: What can you do this week to be more faithful to Christ and his Gospel?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1&version=NIV
Paul identifies himself as an apostle sent by Jesus and God as he begins this critical letter (1:1–2). After wishing the churches grace and peace (vv. 3–5), Paul expresses amazement that they have turned so quickly to a “different gospel”—one which is a perversion of the truth Paul teaches (vv. 6–9).
Because the strategy of those carrying this “different gospel” features a personal attack on Paul, the great missionary feels compelled to defend his apostleship. This defense is begun here and carried on through chapter 2. Paul has been accused of making the Gospel “easy” to please men: Does his condemnation of those bringing the “other” gospel sound wishy–washy? (v. 10) Paul has been accused of distorting the true Gospel. But he received his Gospel directly from Jesus rather than from men! (v. 11) After Paul’s conversion he did not even consult with the other apostles, but went off on his own to study (vv. 12–17). It was years before he even saw Peter and James and then they praised God for Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles (vv. 18–24). The inescapable conclusion is that the innuendos and attacks on Paul’s credibility are simply not true!
Discussion questions
What do you think the key verse of this chapter is? Why?
Paul made a point to say in verse 12 that he received his revelation Jesus Christ not man. Why do you think he makes this point?
For personal reflection: What can you do this week to be more faithful to Christ and his Gospel?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Week 2 Day 1
welcome back to week two. Below is the only reading today. Tomorrow we will start with Galatians 1
There are thirteen books in the New Testament that bear the name of Paul as author: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians Ephesians, Colossians, 1 & 2Thessalonians, Philemon,, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus. All of which are in letter form. In the days of Paul there was a long tradition of producing letters for public consumption. Paul’s letters were intended to be read aloud to his congregations. Primarily because the literacy rate was low back then and probably most of the people in his churches could not read, or read very little.
Since Paul’s letters were intended to be read aloud, he wisely utilized a number of traditional materials in his letters, like hymns and confessions of faith. These were memorable and easy to retain in an oral culture.
Paul’s letters followed the typical form of the Greek private letter. This consisted of three main parts: the introduction, the body, and the conclusion. Some would expand the parts to four, considering the thanksgiving as a separate entity.
Sending letters was not always easy back then. It often involved the use of a secretary to write down the communication. There was no postal service back then either. The Roman government had a system of couriers for official communications, but this was not available to the public. One usually had to depend on other means, such as channels of commerce or people who were traveling to a destination where one had friends or acquaintances. Some scholars believe that Paul’s usual practice was to use a secretary.
Paul has mentioned a cosender in the salutation in eight of his letters. In six of them he mentions Timothy alongside himself. Some have said that the cosender had some voice in the actual contents of the letters. Cosenders seem to have been primarily Paul’s coworkers who had worked closely with the congregations that he had addressed.
A question that has come up over the years is, how did his letters come to be put together and eventually find their way into the New Testament canon. There have been many theories, but the most popular one was from Edgar Goodspeed who suggested that the letters were assembled around 90 A.D. after the publication of Acts, which stimulated people’s interest in Paul. A disciple of Paul then set out to gather all the available letters of Paul. He then assembled the collection of epistles for publication and distribution to the churches.
The first letter we are going to look at in this E Study is Galatians. With regard to certain historical questions surrounding Galatians, there is very little doubt. Few scholars seriously question, for example, that Paul was the author. Again, the text makes it quite clear that certain individuals were creating spiritual rebellion in the Galatian community by preaching a false gospel that pressured the Gentile believers to observe Jewish ceremonies, particularly circumcision (1:7–9; 5:2–3, 7–12; 6:12–13). On the other hand, considerable debate exists regarding the date, the recipients, and the precise occasion for the writing of this important letter.
Many scholars today identify the recipients of this letter as the churches founded by Paul and Barnabas in Iconium, Lystra and Derbe (Acts 14:1–23). They were located in the southern part of the Roman province of Galatia, in the interior of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). The name of this province comes from a region to the north, where the race of Galatians (originally from Gaul) had settled, and a minority opinion holds that the churches in question were located in this area—an opinion that affects the dating of the letter. Appeal is made to Acts 16:6 in support of the view that Paul founded some churches there, but this text is at best ambiguous, and other evidence is not strong.
A more complicated but related question has to do with the dating of the letter. The basic point of the debate is whether Paul wrote Galatians before or after the so-called Apostolic Council in Jerusalem, which we just read about in Acts 15, is dated by most scholars in ad 49 (certainly no earlier than 48). Paul apparently refers to this council in Gal. 2:1–10, but many have argued that his description conflicts with the Acts narrative, especially since he fails to mention the decree reported in Acts 15:22–29.
Some scholars avoid the problem by arguing that Galatians was written before the council. (This argument assumes that the letter was written to churches in the southern part of the province. The view that the churches in question were located to the north prohibits this dating, since Paul did not evangelize the northern region until after the council.) According to this early dating, Gal. 2 does not conflict with Acts for the simple reason that at the time of writing this letter the council had not yet taken place. Paul’s comments, therefore, must refer to a different meeting (probably the one described in Acts 11:29–30). To other scholars this solution appears too easy, especially in view of the strong similarities between Acts 15 and Gal. 2. It is possible to argue that both passages refer to the same event and that the differences can be accounted for by recognizing the very different perspectives of the two authors. According to this view, Galatians must have been written after ad 49, and the preferred date is in the mid-fifties, while Paul was in Ephesus during his third missionary journey.
The controversy about the date of Galatians is not a mere scholarly game. Certain subtleties about the meaning of the letter—to say nothing about larger questions regarding the history of the early church—are indeed affected by one’s view of its relationship to the Jerusalem council. The present commentary assumes Galatians was written in the mid-fifties. Nevertheless, since it is not possible to achieve certainty on the question, it would be unwise to interpret the letter in a way that depends heavily on how it is dated. In particular, an effort must be made not to give key explanations that would be rendered invalid by the adoption of an alternate historical setting. Fortunately, the primary thrust of Paul’s argument is clear enough and does not revolve around our ability to identify the setting with precision.
Questions for discussion or reflection
Why do you think Paul’s letters were not dated?
What effect does it have that they are not dated, if any?
Communication was vital back then as it is today. Do you think the media and the diversification of communication today is positive or a negative? Why or why not?
There are thirteen books in the New Testament that bear the name of Paul as author: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians Ephesians, Colossians, 1 & 2Thessalonians, Philemon,, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus. All of which are in letter form. In the days of Paul there was a long tradition of producing letters for public consumption. Paul’s letters were intended to be read aloud to his congregations. Primarily because the literacy rate was low back then and probably most of the people in his churches could not read, or read very little.
Since Paul’s letters were intended to be read aloud, he wisely utilized a number of traditional materials in his letters, like hymns and confessions of faith. These were memorable and easy to retain in an oral culture.
Paul’s letters followed the typical form of the Greek private letter. This consisted of three main parts: the introduction, the body, and the conclusion. Some would expand the parts to four, considering the thanksgiving as a separate entity.
Sending letters was not always easy back then. It often involved the use of a secretary to write down the communication. There was no postal service back then either. The Roman government had a system of couriers for official communications, but this was not available to the public. One usually had to depend on other means, such as channels of commerce or people who were traveling to a destination where one had friends or acquaintances. Some scholars believe that Paul’s usual practice was to use a secretary.
Paul has mentioned a cosender in the salutation in eight of his letters. In six of them he mentions Timothy alongside himself. Some have said that the cosender had some voice in the actual contents of the letters. Cosenders seem to have been primarily Paul’s coworkers who had worked closely with the congregations that he had addressed.
A question that has come up over the years is, how did his letters come to be put together and eventually find their way into the New Testament canon. There have been many theories, but the most popular one was from Edgar Goodspeed who suggested that the letters were assembled around 90 A.D. after the publication of Acts, which stimulated people’s interest in Paul. A disciple of Paul then set out to gather all the available letters of Paul. He then assembled the collection of epistles for publication and distribution to the churches.
The first letter we are going to look at in this E Study is Galatians. With regard to certain historical questions surrounding Galatians, there is very little doubt. Few scholars seriously question, for example, that Paul was the author. Again, the text makes it quite clear that certain individuals were creating spiritual rebellion in the Galatian community by preaching a false gospel that pressured the Gentile believers to observe Jewish ceremonies, particularly circumcision (1:7–9; 5:2–3, 7–12; 6:12–13). On the other hand, considerable debate exists regarding the date, the recipients, and the precise occasion for the writing of this important letter.
Many scholars today identify the recipients of this letter as the churches founded by Paul and Barnabas in Iconium, Lystra and Derbe (Acts 14:1–23). They were located in the southern part of the Roman province of Galatia, in the interior of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). The name of this province comes from a region to the north, where the race of Galatians (originally from Gaul) had settled, and a minority opinion holds that the churches in question were located in this area—an opinion that affects the dating of the letter. Appeal is made to Acts 16:6 in support of the view that Paul founded some churches there, but this text is at best ambiguous, and other evidence is not strong.
A more complicated but related question has to do with the dating of the letter. The basic point of the debate is whether Paul wrote Galatians before or after the so-called Apostolic Council in Jerusalem, which we just read about in Acts 15, is dated by most scholars in ad 49 (certainly no earlier than 48). Paul apparently refers to this council in Gal. 2:1–10, but many have argued that his description conflicts with the Acts narrative, especially since he fails to mention the decree reported in Acts 15:22–29.
Some scholars avoid the problem by arguing that Galatians was written before the council. (This argument assumes that the letter was written to churches in the southern part of the province. The view that the churches in question were located to the north prohibits this dating, since Paul did not evangelize the northern region until after the council.) According to this early dating, Gal. 2 does not conflict with Acts for the simple reason that at the time of writing this letter the council had not yet taken place. Paul’s comments, therefore, must refer to a different meeting (probably the one described in Acts 11:29–30). To other scholars this solution appears too easy, especially in view of the strong similarities between Acts 15 and Gal. 2. It is possible to argue that both passages refer to the same event and that the differences can be accounted for by recognizing the very different perspectives of the two authors. According to this view, Galatians must have been written after ad 49, and the preferred date is in the mid-fifties, while Paul was in Ephesus during his third missionary journey.
The controversy about the date of Galatians is not a mere scholarly game. Certain subtleties about the meaning of the letter—to say nothing about larger questions regarding the history of the early church—are indeed affected by one’s view of its relationship to the Jerusalem council. The present commentary assumes Galatians was written in the mid-fifties. Nevertheless, since it is not possible to achieve certainty on the question, it would be unwise to interpret the letter in a way that depends heavily on how it is dated. In particular, an effort must be made not to give key explanations that would be rendered invalid by the adoption of an alternate historical setting. Fortunately, the primary thrust of Paul’s argument is clear enough and does not revolve around our ability to identify the setting with precision.
Questions for discussion or reflection
Why do you think Paul’s letters were not dated?
What effect does it have that they are not dated, if any?
Communication was vital back then as it is today. Do you think the media and the diversification of communication today is positive or a negative? Why or why not?
Thursday, September 24, 2009
week 1 day 5
read Acts 15
The "Council" of Jerusalem is the term frequently used for a gathering of the Apostles and other Christian leaders which took place in the Holy City approximately at the end of the fifth decade of our Christian era. It was at this meeting that the early Church officially broke out of the womb of theJewish tradition, to reach out to all people regardless of race, language, or cultural background. At the beginning, the early followers of Jesus considered themselves to be fulfilling their Jewish inheritance. They did have practices that were typical of their new beliefs -- Baptism, the celebration of theEucharist, prayer directed to Christ as God --, and they lived in a companionship of love which, across the centuries to this very day, still appears as ideally beautiful. But they appeared to all to be a Jewishsect. They lived as Jews; they participated in Jewish worship; they practiced the traditional Jewish forms of piety; and they observed the ancient Jewish law that had come down from Moses.
The great majority of Christians were Jews. In Antioch as in Jerusalem, they considered themselves bound to circumcision, to their dietary laws, and to the customs that forbid their eating with Gentiles. Since the Eucharist took place on the occasion of a meal, the Jews considered it impossible to celebrate it together with their new Gentile brethren. The difficult dilemma was to decide whether, a Jew, should refuse to share communion with Gentiles; or, as an Apostle, should rise above such distinctions; or again whether you should insist that the non-Jewish Christians, a small minority living among Jews and well aware of Jewish traditions at the time of their Baptism, submit freely to Jewish ritual and law.
The Apostles met in Jerusalem, and some historians argue about the date it was held. There were various theories ranging from A.D. 48 to 52. Scripture scholars wonder whether the assembly described in chapter 15 refers to one meeting or two. But no one disagrees that the assembly was one of the great moments in the history of' the Church.The leading Apostles were there: Peter and Paul, John, and James the Less. So were their close assistants and companions, Barnabas, Silas, Titus, and others. Many, especially those of the Pharisees' party inJerusalem, insisted that the Gentiles should be circumcised and instructed to keep the prescriptions of the law of Moses. Others, especially Paul and Barnabas, argued against them. The author of Acts tells us that the discussion went on a long time. In the end the issue was settled: no conditions arising out of the Jewish law were to be imposed on converts to the young Christian Church.The decision of the Council was of course a vital one. It marked the break between Christianity and the Jewish faith. The Christian faith would be represented henceforth and preached in a variety of traditions.
Discussion & or reflection questions
Have you had an experience in a church where there were different worship styles than you were used to? How difficult is it to change workshop styles?
What was running through your mind when reading chapter 15?
The "Council" of Jerusalem is the term frequently used for a gathering of the Apostles and other Christian leaders which took place in the Holy City approximately at the end of the fifth decade of our Christian era. It was at this meeting that the early Church officially broke out of the womb of theJewish tradition, to reach out to all people regardless of race, language, or cultural background. At the beginning, the early followers of Jesus considered themselves to be fulfilling their Jewish inheritance. They did have practices that were typical of their new beliefs -- Baptism, the celebration of theEucharist, prayer directed to Christ as God --, and they lived in a companionship of love which, across the centuries to this very day, still appears as ideally beautiful. But they appeared to all to be a Jewishsect. They lived as Jews; they participated in Jewish worship; they practiced the traditional Jewish forms of piety; and they observed the ancient Jewish law that had come down from Moses.
The great majority of Christians were Jews. In Antioch as in Jerusalem, they considered themselves bound to circumcision, to their dietary laws, and to the customs that forbid their eating with Gentiles. Since the Eucharist took place on the occasion of a meal, the Jews considered it impossible to celebrate it together with their new Gentile brethren. The difficult dilemma was to decide whether, a Jew, should refuse to share communion with Gentiles; or, as an Apostle, should rise above such distinctions; or again whether you should insist that the non-Jewish Christians, a small minority living among Jews and well aware of Jewish traditions at the time of their Baptism, submit freely to Jewish ritual and law.
The Apostles met in Jerusalem, and some historians argue about the date it was held. There were various theories ranging from A.D. 48 to 52. Scripture scholars wonder whether the assembly described in chapter 15 refers to one meeting or two. But no one disagrees that the assembly was one of the great moments in the history of' the Church.The leading Apostles were there: Peter and Paul, John, and James the Less. So were their close assistants and companions, Barnabas, Silas, Titus, and others. Many, especially those of the Pharisees' party inJerusalem, insisted that the Gentiles should be circumcised and instructed to keep the prescriptions of the law of Moses. Others, especially Paul and Barnabas, argued against them. The author of Acts tells us that the discussion went on a long time. In the end the issue was settled: no conditions arising out of the Jewish law were to be imposed on converts to the young Christian Church.The decision of the Council was of course a vital one. It marked the break between Christianity and the Jewish faith. The Christian faith would be represented henceforth and preached in a variety of traditions.
Discussion & or reflection questions
Have you had an experience in a church where there were different worship styles than you were used to? How difficult is it to change workshop styles?
What was running through your mind when reading chapter 15?
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Day 4
Day 4
Read Acts 13 & 14
The mission of Paul and Barnabas that is in these two chapters is usually referred to as Paul’s first missionary journey. It was not his first mission, however. Luke had already mentioned others, the work of Damascus, the silent years in the area of Tarsus, the work with Barnabas in Antioch. What was different about this new undertaking was its pushing into new frontiers, moving westward, and Paul continued to make new breakthroughs, particularly in his outreach to gentiles.
Reflection questions
What kind of opposition have you faced because of your faith?
Paul and Barnabas made a big difference in influencing the gentiles to believe in Christ. Who in your life has been influential in helping you understand your belief in God and your faith?
Discussion question
In seeing Paul and Barnabas courage, faith and endurance, how are you challenged to serve the Lord more completely?
Read Acts 13 & 14
The mission of Paul and Barnabas that is in these two chapters is usually referred to as Paul’s first missionary journey. It was not his first mission, however. Luke had already mentioned others, the work of Damascus, the silent years in the area of Tarsus, the work with Barnabas in Antioch. What was different about this new undertaking was its pushing into new frontiers, moving westward, and Paul continued to make new breakthroughs, particularly in his outreach to gentiles.
Reflection questions
What kind of opposition have you faced because of your faith?
Paul and Barnabas made a big difference in influencing the gentiles to believe in Christ. Who in your life has been influential in helping you understand your belief in God and your faith?
Discussion question
In seeing Paul and Barnabas courage, faith and endurance, how are you challenged to serve the Lord more completely?
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
week 1 day 3
Few areas of New Testament research are more difficult or their results, than the matters of chronology. The NT writers were not interested in providing dates or in linking salvation history with world history. Luke shows more of such concerns than anyone else, but even his effort was limited. Consequently, the various chronologies offered by scholars often differ radically from one another however; none of them are set in stone. I have listed below a website that you will find interesting, they are:
http://www.apostlepaulthefilm.com/paul/timeline.htm
http://www.apostlepaulthefilm.com/paul/journeys.htm
Here you will be able to see the approximate timeline of Paul and also an outline and map of Paul’s journeys that we will be studying for the next 20 weeks. Spend some time looking them over. You might want to put them in your favorites or jot them down because as we study his letters, you may want to refer back to them.
Questions for reflection or discussion
Have you experienced a spiritual journey for witnessing to God? What kind of impact did it have on you? What kind of impact did it have on others?
If you haven’t been on a mission trip, how can you change that? Have you considered going on one of CUMC’s mission trips.
http://www.apostlepaulthefilm.com/paul/timeline.htm
http://www.apostlepaulthefilm.com/paul/journeys.htm
Here you will be able to see the approximate timeline of Paul and also an outline and map of Paul’s journeys that we will be studying for the next 20 weeks. Spend some time looking them over. You might want to put them in your favorites or jot them down because as we study his letters, you may want to refer back to them.
Questions for reflection or discussion
Have you experienced a spiritual journey for witnessing to God? What kind of impact did it have on you? What kind of impact did it have on others?
If you haven’t been on a mission trip, how can you change that? Have you considered going on one of CUMC’s mission trips.
Monday, September 21, 2009
week 1 day 2
Day 2
Read Acts 9:1-31; 11:19-29
The book of Acts first mentions Paul in connection with the stoning of Stephen. Paul was the young man at whose feet Stephen’s assailants laid their garments (Acts 7:58). At this point Luke referred to him by his Hebrew name Saul. He did not switch to Paul’s Roman name until the outset of Paul’s missionary journey (Acts 13:9). Paul’s connection with Stephen does not appear to be incidental. It was Stephen’s fellow Hellenists whom Paul targeted as a persecutor, and he may already have clashed with them before Stephen’s martyrdom.
Paul’s conversion or call is in Acts 9. Was Paul’s experience a conversion or is it a call? Paul was not converted from one religious group to another but remained a faithful Jew after his vision of Christ. You could understand that Paul’s experience was much like the call experience of the Old Testament prophets. However you look at it, it was a powerful moment for Paul.
Have you every experienced a conversion or call like Paul?
How did it affect you? How did it affect others around you?
If you haven’t, do you believe you will experience one? Why or why not?
Read Acts 9:1-31; 11:19-29
The book of Acts first mentions Paul in connection with the stoning of Stephen. Paul was the young man at whose feet Stephen’s assailants laid their garments (Acts 7:58). At this point Luke referred to him by his Hebrew name Saul. He did not switch to Paul’s Roman name until the outset of Paul’s missionary journey (Acts 13:9). Paul’s connection with Stephen does not appear to be incidental. It was Stephen’s fellow Hellenists whom Paul targeted as a persecutor, and he may already have clashed with them before Stephen’s martyrdom.
Paul’s conversion or call is in Acts 9. Was Paul’s experience a conversion or is it a call? Paul was not converted from one religious group to another but remained a faithful Jew after his vision of Christ. You could understand that Paul’s experience was much like the call experience of the Old Testament prophets. However you look at it, it was a powerful moment for Paul.
Have you every experienced a conversion or call like Paul?
How did it affect you? How did it affect others around you?
If you haven’t, do you believe you will experience one? Why or why not?
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Week 1 day 1
Paul nor the book of Acts really says much about who Paul was and about his family. Some scholars argue that Paul came from a wealthy family, but there is really very little evidence of that to go by. What we do know is that Paul came from Tarsus and he was in the tent making trade (Acts 18:3).
It has been asked over the years if Paul had any formal education. Hellenistic (Greek) cities like Tarsus had a long tradition of primary education. Boys that were between the ages of 6 and 14, were sent to elementary schools, where they were trained in the basic skills of reading, writing, simple arithmetic, and music. It is apparent with the writings of Paul being in a fluent, educated Greek manner that you would conclude yes he had some formal education. Back then the Greek secondary education was attended only by the rich, which could be further evidence that Paul was from a wealthy family.
Paul grew up in a world ruled by Rome. His native city Tarsus was a free city under Rome, which meant that it had a measure of independence and self-government. When Paul moved to Jerusalem, he lived in a city which was even more directly controlled by the Romans.
Paul’s Jewish pedigree included his membership in the tribe of Benjamin. Only two Jewish tribes survived the exile, Judah and Benjamin, the two tribes of the southern kingdom. The first Jewish king, Saul was a Benjamite, and Paul may have received his Jewish name in memory of him. Paul’s teacher Gamaliel was also a Benjamite. It is interesting that Paul never referred to himself as Saul in any of his letters.
Paul was a Pharisee, who were the religious, political, and social movement within Judaism that emphasized the keeping of the Jewish law; not just in written form, but also in their extensive oral tradition of interpreting it. Paul studied the law, became faultless in keeping it and passionate in his endeavor to protect it from any would be enemies.
Gamaliel was the outstanding teacher of the law in Paul’s day. There were two main schools of interpretation back then. One was Hillel, which headed the more liberal school, which emphasized flexibility and tolerance. Hillelites were more open to Hellenistic (Greek) influence and advocated cooperation with the Roman authorities. Shammai headed the more conservative, stricter school of interpretation. Shammaites were not so open to outside influences. Gamaliel was of the school of Hillel thus, how Paul received is legalistic out view.
Gamaliel is best known to New Testament students for his advice to the Sanhedrin when the apostles were hauled before that body for having preached in the name of Christ (Acts 5:27-27). Gamaliel was a member of the Sanhedrin, which at that time was comprised of a majority which came from the Sadducees and the high priestly families.
Some people including myself have been curious about what Paul looked like but unfortunately there is very little information about what Paul looked like. Occasionally in his letters he referred to some personal characteristic. For instance in 2 Corinthians Paul noted how some had talked about the unimpressiveness of his physical presence and his speech in comparison to the power of his letters (10:10; 11:6). There was a writing that was called The Acts of Paul, which was not a totally accurate writing, but may have preserved some reliable traditions about Paul. The description is: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good stat of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness.”
Was Paul married? Was Paul divorced? Was Paul widowed? It has been undetermined for sure as to what Paul’s marital status actually was. In the times of 1 Corinthians he was not married. Some have speculated that Paul was divorced and also that Paul was widowed.
Questions to reflect and to respond to
How has your background and upbringing effected your beliefs in God?
Has your belief system changed as an adult? If so, how?
It has been asked over the years if Paul had any formal education. Hellenistic (Greek) cities like Tarsus had a long tradition of primary education. Boys that were between the ages of 6 and 14, were sent to elementary schools, where they were trained in the basic skills of reading, writing, simple arithmetic, and music. It is apparent with the writings of Paul being in a fluent, educated Greek manner that you would conclude yes he had some formal education. Back then the Greek secondary education was attended only by the rich, which could be further evidence that Paul was from a wealthy family.
Paul grew up in a world ruled by Rome. His native city Tarsus was a free city under Rome, which meant that it had a measure of independence and self-government. When Paul moved to Jerusalem, he lived in a city which was even more directly controlled by the Romans.
Paul’s Jewish pedigree included his membership in the tribe of Benjamin. Only two Jewish tribes survived the exile, Judah and Benjamin, the two tribes of the southern kingdom. The first Jewish king, Saul was a Benjamite, and Paul may have received his Jewish name in memory of him. Paul’s teacher Gamaliel was also a Benjamite. It is interesting that Paul never referred to himself as Saul in any of his letters.
Paul was a Pharisee, who were the religious, political, and social movement within Judaism that emphasized the keeping of the Jewish law; not just in written form, but also in their extensive oral tradition of interpreting it. Paul studied the law, became faultless in keeping it and passionate in his endeavor to protect it from any would be enemies.
Gamaliel was the outstanding teacher of the law in Paul’s day. There were two main schools of interpretation back then. One was Hillel, which headed the more liberal school, which emphasized flexibility and tolerance. Hillelites were more open to Hellenistic (Greek) influence and advocated cooperation with the Roman authorities. Shammai headed the more conservative, stricter school of interpretation. Shammaites were not so open to outside influences. Gamaliel was of the school of Hillel thus, how Paul received is legalistic out view.
Gamaliel is best known to New Testament students for his advice to the Sanhedrin when the apostles were hauled before that body for having preached in the name of Christ (Acts 5:27-27). Gamaliel was a member of the Sanhedrin, which at that time was comprised of a majority which came from the Sadducees and the high priestly families.
Some people including myself have been curious about what Paul looked like but unfortunately there is very little information about what Paul looked like. Occasionally in his letters he referred to some personal characteristic. For instance in 2 Corinthians Paul noted how some had talked about the unimpressiveness of his physical presence and his speech in comparison to the power of his letters (10:10; 11:6). There was a writing that was called The Acts of Paul, which was not a totally accurate writing, but may have preserved some reliable traditions about Paul. The description is: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good stat of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness.”
Was Paul married? Was Paul divorced? Was Paul widowed? It has been undetermined for sure as to what Paul’s marital status actually was. In the times of 1 Corinthians he was not married. Some have speculated that Paul was divorced and also that Paul was widowed.
Questions to reflect and to respond to
How has your background and upbringing effected your beliefs in God?
Has your belief system changed as an adult? If so, how?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)