Observations on Acts

These blogs are notes and observations from my study of Acts, usually posted before I preach through a text at Rush Creek.

From the Mount of Olives and across the Kidron

After a lighter walking day yesterday, we started at the Mount of Olives with the goal of walking across the Kidron Valley, up to the City of David, through Hzekiah’s tunnel, and then Back up to the Dung Gate, back across the Old City and out the Jaffa Gate to meet the bus.

The day begin with a local vendor getting on our bus and probably making his profit for the month. My students were were scarfing up his wears, pun unintended; we bought probably 45 scarves from the man. And by “we” I don’t mean “me”.

IMG_1951.JPGThe drop off point for the Mount of Olives walk was (as usual) crowded with tourists and vendors hawking their wares. Several people in our group decided to ride a camel, so we watched them trot around the parking lot a bit before we were able to take our group down to the railing and have a group photo (including a particularly persistent beggar) and a time of teaching. By this time we’ve been to the southern wall excavations and seen several models of the city of Jerusalem so the students were asking good questions about locations of various things we were seeing.

We walked down to Dominus Flevit, a church about halfway down the Mount where (traditionally) Jesus wept over Jerusalem before the Temple action (Luke 20:41-44). The site was more crowded than previous trips (several large Indian groups), but we managed to get a location to look over the valley and discuss the Triumphal Entry and Jewish Messianic expectations in the first century.

From there we visited the Church of all Nations, the traditional site of the Garden of Gethsemane. This is another site which is usually crowded, and today was no exception. After a quick look at the olive trees many of the students went into the church to see the Agony Stone, the traditional place where Jesus wept on the night he was betrayed. We read Luke 22:39-46 (Jesus’s prayer) and 22:47-53 (the arrest). This gave us a chance to discuss the meaning of Jesus’s prayer asking God to “take this cup” from him.

Something I added to the tour last time was a walk through the Kidron Valley. This involves crossing the busy street and entering the walking path on the other side of the street. The parks service has cleaned this area up considerably in recent years and there are free toilets (not the cleanest in Jerusalem but good enough!) Walking down into the valley, we saw the so-called Tomb of Absalom and the Tomb of Pharaoh’s Daughter, none of which had anything to do with those people. They are impressive Hellenistic tombs, but dating to no more than 150 B.C. One of the locals has built a Bedouin tent here, and had a camel in a pen. Strangely he was not selling anything nor was he interested in talking.

There is a promenade on the west side of the Kidron which makes for an easier walk (I did stop halfway to explain the view and catch my breath). The walk ends at the south east corner of the Temple Mount, near the Southern Temple archaeology park, offering a unique view of that end of the southern Wall. It is just a short walk from there to the City of David. It looks like there are quite a few things being renovated in this site, mostly some walkways around the Stepped Structure and administration building. We could only look down on these things from the overlook.

IMG_1976.JPGWhat most people want to see at the City of David is Hezekiah’s Tunnel. This is the water system built by Hezekiah according to 2 Kings 20:20 and 2 Chronicles 32:30. After a short walk down through tunnels to the Canaanite spring, there is a split in the Tunnel between the “wet” tunnel and the “dry” Canaanite tunnel. The wet tunnel has water flowing over the knees, and is completely dark. This is the first trip I have led where the majority took the wet tunnel. I, however, took the safer route through the dry tunnel (fear of chaffing drives many of my decisions).

The dry Canaanite tunnel exits near the Jebusite walls, and the park has re-configured the walk further down the hill to the pool of Siloam. We no longer exit the park and walk along the street (which is busy and potentially dangerous). There are now a series of wooden walkways within the park and partially through a private neighborhood. This is much more convenient and it appears the site is developing additional viewpoints along the way.

The pool of Siloam is mentioned in connection with Jesus healing a blind man (John 9:7). In the first century it may have functioned as a public mikveh for pilgrims arriving at Jerusalem from the south. Since the pool was discovered more than ten years ago, additional work has been done to expose steps which appear to lead all the way up to Wilson’s Arch. Although the presentation of these recent discoveries is clear, it is a damp smelly place.

We had a bit of a scare when one of the students did not get on the shuttle back to the Dung Gate, but eventually we found her. This did allow most of the students to enjoy some ice cream in the shade (I had neither ice cream or shade). After our scare I took the students to the Cardo, the remnants of the Byzantine Roman Road through Jerusalem, and to the remnants of Hezekiah’s Wall on our walk back to the Jaffa Gate.

I planned to return to the hotel early enough to allow the students some time in the swimming pool. They seem to have appreciated this a great deal after three days of serious walking in and around the Old City.

As I finish up this post, I can hear music from a children’s concert as people are beginning to celebrate Shabbat.

We leave Jerusalem tomorrow morning and head north to Caesarea and our hotel on the Sea of Galilee.

Beginning from Jerusalem 

This was our first full day in Jerusalem. After a short walk from our hotel we visited the Garden Tomb. As always this was an early highlight for everyone. Our Garden Tomb guide was Peter, and his presentation of the facts about the Garden was excellent and his faith was both genuine and evident. For those who do not know the Garden Tomb, this is a rare British evangelical site next to Gordon’s Cavalry, a rocky cliff side that looks vaguely like a skull. The location has a good case for being the actual site for the crucifixion, burial, and resurrection although most scholars think the Holy Seplucher is the more likely location. I heard one guide say a Catholic friend told him something like “it isn’t the place where Jesus was buried, but it should be.”

From there we walked up to the Jaffa Gate where we visited the Tower of David Museum, although to be honest it does not have all that much to do with David. Sometimes the traditional names are not very helpful. The reason I wanted to go through this somewhat newer site was the overview of the history of Jerusalem from the Canaanite period to Suliman the Magnificent. There are several small museum galleries dedicated to periods in Israel’s history and one or two very helpful dioramas which help to visualize the Second Temple.

For some reason everyone was hungry about noon, so we walked to the Jewish Quarter where there are several options for lunch. Since I know everyone is wondering I had an excellent falafel.

After lunch we walked down the steps to the Davidson Center to visit the Southern Wall excavations. I have always considered this site a highlight of any tour, if you are in the Old City, plan of at least two hours (or more) for the short orientation video and to walk the site. Unfortunately there was a large and noisy group of high school students being led backwards through the site by a few rather bored looking teachers. We avoided them for the most part.

The Davidson Archaeological Park encompasses the southern Wall of the Temple Mount, including several massive Herodian stretch stones on the corner as well as some original steps going up to the double and triple gates. This is where Christian groups sit on the steps and read parts of the gospel. But sadly not a single Christian group other than mine walked down to the recent excavations in the Ophel. I suppose herding 60 older people down the steps would be difficult, but I think it is important to show the sites for both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.

We the went to the Western Wall. I have not been there since they re-oriented the entrance to the men’s section, which looks like a long term change. I noticed quite a few students put their prayers in the cracks of the Wall this time. Since it was late in the day, the plaza was not crowded, but I did see something special: a young Jewish man at the Wall praying with his young daughter. I did not know that was possible, but it was very nice to see.

On our way back to the Jaffa Gate we visited the Holy Sepulcher. It has only be a few weeks since the renovations were completed, and the shrine does look much better. But I thought  there were far more people than usual. Every section of the Church was packed and uncomfortable. Even the Syrian chapel was stuffed with two or three large groups. The Rotunda was closed, which was disappointing. If my goal was to confirm my students as official Protestants, I was successful.

We slowly walked back to the Jaffa Gate and then eventually our hotel. I wrote most of this before dinner (the food at our hotel is excellent) and the students are really enjoying their stay here.

Tomorrow we start at Yad VaShem, the Israeli Holocaust museum, then over to the National Museum for the rest of the day.

Goodacre and Still, New Editors of the New International Greek Text Commentary series

nigtc-seriesHere is an exciting announcement from Eerdmans: Mark Goodacre and Todd D. Still are taking over editorship of the New International Greek Text Commentary series. The NIGTC is one on the premier New Testament commentaries published today (here is my review of the recent Romans volume from Longenecker). The press release from Eerdmans indicates previous editor Donald Hagner is scaling back from of his responsibilities and I. Howard Marshall passed away in 2015. Marshall was one of the original editors of the series, along with W. Ward Gasque.

Marshall also contributed the first volume of the series in 1978. His NIGTC Luke commentary one of the first major commentaries I purchased when I was in Bible College and I used Charles A. Wanamaker’s Thessalonians commentary as a textbook for Exegesis of Pauline Epistles when I was in Seminary. I consider F. F. Bruce’s NIGTC Galatians commentary to be one of the best ever written on the letter, even though it was published in 1982. New International Greek Text Commentaries appear frequently on my list of top Bible commentaries. Hopefully the series can be completed (Acts, John, Ephesians) and perhaps a few volumes updated to reflect recent scholarship.

Mark Goodacre

Mark Goodacre

Mark Goodacre is professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at Duke University. He served as the series editor for Library of New Testament Studies (formerly Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement), 2004-2014. He has been one f the major voices questioning Q, for example, is The Case Against Q: Studies in Marcan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2002). In addition, Goodacre is one of the original bibliobloggers, maintaining his NT Blog since 2003, the NT Gateway and he even has a podcast.

todd-still-cropped

Todd Still

Todd Still is the Charles J. and Eleanor McLerran DeLancey Dean and William M. Hinson Professor of Christian Scriptures at Baylor University’s Truett Theological Seminary. He is the co-author of Thinking Through Paul (with Bruce W. Longenecker, Zondervan, 2014) as well the co-editor of the Lightfoot Legacy Series (with Ben Witherington, IVP), including John, Acts, and The Epistles of 2 Corinthians and 1 Peter.

I am happy to say the New International Greek Text Commentary series is in good hands with Goodacre and Still at the helm.

Acts 23 – Paul’s Defense In Jerusalem

Before-the-sanhedrinIn Acts 23:1 Paul claims to have “lived his life in good conscience up to this day.”  In the context of a hearing before the Sanhedrin, it is possible to read this as a statement that he has been faithful to the Jewish Law.   This is very similar to what Paul says in Acts 24:16 when he describes his entry into the Temple as “I always take pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man.”  He even points out that he was giving alms to the poor (the collection) and participating in a purification ritual when he was unjustly attacked.

In fact, Paul was in the temple “purifying himself” (ἁγνίζω, Acts 21:24, 24:18).  The verb is not normally associated with the Nazarite vow (which took thirty days, not the seven mentioned in Acts 21).  The verb is used in John 11:55 for Jews purifying themselves prior to the Passover (cf., JW 6, 425, Ant. 12, 145). Pilgrims arriving in Jerusalem from Gentile territory purified themselves in the Temple. In Num 19:12 the verb is used to purify oneself after touching a corpse.  That Paul was willing to undergo this level of purity ritual at this point in his career indicates that he is still willing to “be a Jew among the Jews” (1 Cor 9:20).

Paul goes a bit further and claims to be a Pharisee.  After his exchange with the High Priest in Acts 23:2-5, Paul shifts the focus to the controversy between Pharisees and Sadducees (23:6-10). This maneuver has caused some commentators to criticize Paul. It is not an honest argument by Paul, he instigates a near riot between the two factions of the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees were a minority in the Sanhedrin, but a popular and vocal minority. They believed in the resurrection of the dead as well as angels and spirits.

Is this true? Can Paul be considered a “practicing Pharisee” at this point in his ministry?  For some interpreters, this is not at all the historical Paul who wrote Galatians.  At the very least, he has broken purity traditions by eating with Gentiles. Yet with regard to the issue of the resurrection, he was a Pharisee.  Paul is simply stating that he agrees on this major point, and for the Pharisees, at this moment, it is enough for them to defend Paul.

By making this statement, Paul gains the favor of the Pharisees while enraging the Sadducees. The argument that ensues was so fierce that the Roman official thought that Paul would be “torn to pieces,” so he takes him back to the barracks, leaving the Jews to their “theological dispute.”

While it was a crafty way of deflecting attention away from himself, it is possible that Paul was serious – with respect to the Law Paul has a clear conscience. James Dunn offers the suggestion that Paul’s statement was less for the Sanhedrin (which had probably already judged him as guilty), but for the Roman tribune and soldiers.  The word conscience (συνείδησις) is a concept that does not really appear in Hebrew (Dunn, Beginning at Jerusalem, 974, n. 73, the word is only found in the LXX in Eccl. 10:29 and Wisdom 17:10).  If he spoke Greek and used this particular expression, it is possible that he was claiming to the Romans that he was not guilty of any crime.

What do we do with this incident?  Is Paul playing both sides in order to gain converts?  Did he really “keep the Law” while telling Gentiles to “not keep the Law”?  I can think of a number of issues I might hold loosely so that I can reach both sides.  Perhaps there is an application to Christian involvement in politics or other social issues.

Paul’s Missionary Strategy in Acts (Part 1)

[This is a guest post from my Advanced Studies in Acts class on Paul’s Missionary Strategy in Acts. Click here for part 2.]

The Apostle Paul is undoubtedly one of the greatest missionaries to walk this earth. The fruit of his labor is convincing enough! I’m sure Paul would suggest that he was simply a vessel. And a vessel he was. But, what does that mean? Some might say he just went wherever the Spirit led him. I might add, we should always be obedient to the direction the Spirit guides us in. With that being said, Paul did not just sit around and wait for anything supernatural happen.

Missionary ChurchRoland Allen is one of the classics of our era who has written on Paul’s missionary methods that many look to for understanding. He believes Paul’s ministry strategy was more a lack of strategy than anything else. He calls it spontaneous expansion: “This is what I mean by spontaneous expansion. I mean the expansion which follows the exhorted and unorganized activity of individual members of the Church explaining to others the Gospel they have found for themselves; I mean the expansion which follows the irresistible attraction of the Christian Church…” (Allen 10).

In his book The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church, Allen argues that the less control we have over the church, the more growth we will see. The more freedom we allow the Spirit to work, the more the Church will expand. For Allen, no type of organization is important. The prerequisites of a great missionary are 1) faith and 2) dependence on the Spirit.

The Holy Spirit’s influence on Paul’s ministry is evident and vital. It’s the Spirit that called Paul and Barnabas out: “While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work which I have called them’” (Acts 13:2). And it’s the Holy Spirit who led them where they were to go: “The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus” (Acts 13:4). Just a few chapters later in the narrative of Acts, Luke again shows the presence of the Spirit in these missionary journeys: “Paul and his companions traveled throughout the region of Phrygia and Galatia, have been kept by the Holy Spirit from preaching the word in the province of Asia” (Acts 16:6). I wonder what Paul was thinking after this: “Come on! There is so much potential in the province of Asia. The gospel needs to be preached there!” But God had other plans.

These are just a few examples of the influence of the Spirit in Paul’s ministry. Surely, many more communicate the Spirit’s guiding and the importance of the Spirit’s ‘hand’ on the fruit of our work.

Can you think of any passages, especially in the book of Acts, that communicate the absolute need of dependence on the Spirit in our ministry? Is Allen right in suggesting that we should drop all ‘control’ and allow more freedom for the Spirit to expand the Church? Is there room for organization and strategic planning in missions? Why or why not? Was Paul more strategically oriented in his ministry or completely dependent upon spontaneous expansion?