The Jesus of the Gentiles: Charting the History of how God Brought Salvation to the Rest of the World

The Jesus of the Gentiles
Acts 6-10
Ephesians 3:5-10 says, “5which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; 6to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel, 7of which I was made a minister, according to the gift of God's grace which was given to me according to the working of His power. 8To me, the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ, 9and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things 10so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places.” When Jesus came to earth, He opened the Gospel to everyone, Jew and Gentile. Although this window was immediately opened, it took time for the church (composed by people of Jewish descent) to overcome the entrenched traditions and notions they mentally depended on, and to accept these Gentiles as brothers in Christ. In describing Jewish sentiment towards Gentiles during the time period Acts was written, Barclay writes that, “at their worst, they (Jewish People) declared that God had created Gentiles to be fuel for the fires of hell; at their mildest they believed that someday the Gentiles would become their servants.” (Barclay 53) Chapters six through ten in The Book of Acts can be viewed as a history of the construction of the bridge that God directed built between Heaven, and all corners of the earth.

Acts chapters six through ten illustrate God’s complete understanding of man by the gentle way in which He primes the Jewish church to accept Christians of all different ethnicities. Toward this end, there are three major cornerstones within the five chapters: Stephen, who articulates a God of all cultures; Saul, who is converted to Paul and raised to be the Gentile’s greatest missionary and advocate; and Peter, who breaks ground at the house of Cornelius, and represents God’s first wave of assault on Satan’s stronghold, the Gentiles.

Stephen was selected among a group of seven (considered to be the church’s first deacons) to resolve a dispute between Hellenist Jews and Hebrew Jews. [i] The Hebrew Jews considered themselves “purebred” and took great pride in their heritage, which led to the discrimination of the Hellenist Jews who spoke mainly Greek and were looked at as half Jews. This is extremely important to understand, because God confronts Judaism’s pride slowly, essentially stating “Hebrews and Hellenists are equal.[ii]” Stephen’s character emerges through the settling of this dispute and he becomes viewed as a leader, teaching and preaching Jesus in the Synagogues, even performing miracles. (Acts 6:8) His emphatic teaching leads to him being setup, arrested and sent to trial by the Sanhedrin. Many theologians consider Acts seven to be “Stephen’s defense,” but it reads nothing like a defense. While he was speaking, he knew that his words could only result in his death. His speech was not in defense of himself for whom he apparently had no regard, but in his God that he followed and for whom he desired to die rather than to have people misunderstand. He used Abraham[iii], Joseph[iv], Moses[v], and The Tabernacle[vi] (God) to construct his argument and condemn their mindset. His three main points to the Jewish religious leaders were: they were resisting the Holy Spirit as they had always done; they were persecuting and killing prophets as they had always done; and they were breaking the laws of Moses as they had always done. (Boice 125) Using Jewish heroes like the father of their race, and the savior of their people to incriminate them, they went berserk and murdered Stephen. Barclay notes that the Sanhedrin had no authority to put someone to death, so this was a lynching, not a legal death sentence. (Barclay 61) The gist of what Stephen was trying to communicate was simple. He advocated a God so big, that he could not be confined to one nation, one people, or one building. His ideology seems a little more progressive then that of his companions, and he should definitely be viewed as “the voice in the wilderness” for open Christianity.

Stephen’s death elicits massive persecution of the Church, presumably led by Saul. The Christian community was comfortable, and had no reason to disperse and spread the gospel. These events show the hand of God, as He merely sends His people out on missions to all corners of the globe.[vii] Among those to disperse was a man named Philip, who was selected along with Stephen as one of the seven to absolve the issue between the Hellenist and Hebrew Jews. He travels to the Samaritans to perform miracles and preach Jesus in what the scripture indicates as a massive revival.[viii] (Acts 8:5-8) This marks another example of Jesus reaching out to people who the Jews considered abominable. They were “half Jews” as well, but because of religious affiliation more than heritage. God is still busy preparing the world for His radical change, and puts one more piece into play here. After starting a revival, the Holy Spirit transports Philip to go talk to an Ethiopian Eunich. Blaiklock points out that Philip was obviously very bold and in tune with God to be getting rides around the universe like that, and compares him to an Old Testament prophet. (Blaiklock 79) He baptizes the eunich (another Gentile) and again gets carried away by the Holy Spirit.

Next, God picks out the man to pioneer His agenda to the world. A massive and daunting expedition, His representative would have to be ambitious, ideologically stubborn, and extremely passionate. Who better then Saul? God waits until Saul is on the tail end of a long journey implying too much time to think, then confronts him. Immediately, he is obedient, almost as if God literally lifted a veil off of Paul’s heart. God audibly tells him, in what Boice declares the summation of all Christianity, to “go into the city and be told what to do.” (Boice 107, Acts 9:6) By combining Acts chapter nine with Galatians chapter one, we can surmise the events of Paul’s conversion and sanctification. From the Damascus Road where he met God, he was taken in by Ananias, recovered, learned, then started preaching in Damascus. The recipients of his message tried to kill him, and he went off to Arabia by himself[ix] to study God. Three to five years later he returns and continues teaching in Damascus. Newly converted and immediately out on his first preaching mission evoking the crowds to attempt to kill him… God found his guy. (Acts 9:20-23)

Everything is in place for God to start his mission. Peter has been traveling around preaching, healing, and raising the dead through the Holy Spirit when he is led to settle down in Joppa is the residence of a man named Simon, who is a tanner by trade. (Acts 9:31-43) A tanner would be considered permanently unclean by the Jewish because of the constant presence of dead animals that the trade requires. (Numbers 19:11-13) Peter’s decision to stay at his house shows the progressiveness in which Peter is growing in the Lord. (Barclay 82) While abiding here, God sends Cornelius, a Roman Centurion, a vision that results in him sending messengers to Simon the Tanner’s door to retrieve Peter. While the Centurion’s messengers are on their way, Peter has three consecutive dreams of God telling him to eat what can simply be described as Gentile foods. (See Leviticus 11) Peter objects, stating to God that he has never eaten anything unclean, to which God replies “What I have cleansed, no man can call unclean.” Peter gets the message; no man is common or unclean. Peter’s understanding and application of this is imminent. When the centurions men arrive they stop at the door because they know its forbidden for a Jew to have unclean men in his house, but peter invites them to enter. (Barclay 82) The men bring Peter back to their master’s house. While Peter is preaching, the Holy Spirit descends on the Roman people. The significance here is vivid. Throughout the book of Acts to this point, the Holy Spirit was bestowed on men by God through the apostles and baptism. In this case, there was no baptism or laying on of hands as of yet for these Gentiles. God simply reached out and visually chose them.

The heart of God is exposed through these five chapters by the methods He used to evoke His will. The Creator of the universe could have easily shook things up and obliterated traditions and cultures in order to get His message to the Gentiles, but He chose to work slowly, tweaking the heart of man, and carefully navigating around cultural boundaries to achieve His will. This demonstrated both His indefinite knowledge of man, and His patient love for man. In chapter six, He shows the Jewish people (the chosen people) that people born of a different heritage that share their faith should be equally accepted; not as Hellenistic Christian Jews and Hebrew Christian Jews, but as fellow believers. Then for the first time in history, chapter seven displays the first recorded speech derived from the notion that God is too big to limit to one group of people. Their pride still remaining perfectly intact, the Christian Jews must then accept the Samaritans, who shared their heritage but not their customs. God was slowly leading His people through this radical change sensitively, in baby steps. While simmering the hearts of His people, He chooses Paul to represent Him and spearhead His message to the Gentiles. While Paul is being trained, God initiates a skirmish at a Roman centurion’s house, and the spiritual war that had been raging for thousands of years was suddenly opened to all corners of the earth. If this cannot portray the love and intricacy of God, then nothing can.

[i] Every Friday two collectors would go house to house to receive a collection of both money and goods for the poor to be distributed later in the day. This was called the “kuppah” meaning “basket.” Also, a daily collection was taken at the synagogue called the “tamhui,” meaning “tray” for families too poor to wait for the weekend. (Barclay 51) The Jewish people understood this as their natural civic duty, but were often chastised by Old Testament prophets for neglecting this. (Boice 112) In this case, the complaint was that the Hellenist widows and poor were getting left out when these goods were distributed.
[ii] Note that at this time, many priests were being converted to Christianity. (Acts 6:7) One cannot help but wonder what role this played later on in the book of Acts as the tension between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians increases. Few Jewish people would be more fundamental and traditional in their beliefs then a Jewish priest.
[iii] Stephen points out that god visited Abraham before He lived in Haran. This is a similar argument to the one he makes about Moses, both illustrated that God has worked and appeared in places other than the “holy land.” Wherever God is present, the land is holy. This point Stephen makes informs us about and event that the Old Testament does not depict. (Boice 121) He also points out that Abraham always considered himself a pilgrim. (Hebrews 11:10) This analogy was meant as a slap in the face to the religious officials that were so comfortable and settled in on earth that they had allowed God’s temporal blessings to eclipse their sense of God’s presence. (Boice 122)
[iv] Joseph was mistreated, sent into a foreign land, and became the Savior of his people. Possibly an inference to Jesus.
[v] Moses was the sacred lawgiver and cornerstone to Judaism, but Stephen points out how he was twice rejected by his people. He also talks about how God personally goes to talk to Moses in Midian, another indication that Jerusalem was not the only “Holy Land.” (Acts 7:30-31)
[vi] The Jewish tabernacle was both the source of, and pet of the immense Jewish pride prevalent in that time period. He compares this magnificent gold-plated building to wilderness tabernacle, which was basically a mobile tent, and states that there is no significant difference between them. He quotes Isaiah 66:1-2 where God asks, “what kind of house can man build for God?” Essentially, the time of the temple had passed, and what they worshipped was nothing more then a few walls and building materials.
[vii] Noteworthy for reflection: The passage talks about a mass exodus of Christians fleeing for their lives, but Jesus’ apostles stayed and preached unharmed. They deserted Him once at Gethsemane but learned their lesson and courageously held fast. These were clearly very changed men.
[viii] Acts 8:13-25 Is one of my favorite passages of scripture. It tells of how the church receives news of the revival amongst the Samaritans, and quickly sends Peter and John to give out the Holy Spirit and minister to the new Christians. They call in the “big guns”
[ix] Paul went to be alone with God. A man of intense Old Testament knowledge, Paul learned about God from God. Not from others explaining God to them. This is a facet of our faith we often overlook.

*I have more of an expositional commentary written about these events and this time period if anyone is curious, or questioning the validity of what is written.

Christianity's Greatest Error

Last night I went to a Narcotics Anonymous meeting to celebrate my friend’s full year without drugs party. I have never seen anything like it before in my life. There were no handshakes in this room, just hugs often followed by tears. The love and support they shared and showed to one another was unbelievable. New comers were immediately accosted by caring individuals hugging them, giving them books, and telling them “hey man, I did this. I did this. I’ve been clean for four months now bro, and if I can do it, then I am going to make f---ing sure you do too.” If there was a member missing, everyone took a moment of silence to pray for that person, than the phone calls and texts would follow urging that person to fight to stay straight. “Hey… we are all in this together.” One of the men told a story about one particular night where he was in bad shape. The guys in his group figured it out, literally kicked his bedroom door in, and spent the entire night sitting with him on his floor crying and trying to outwait the urge to use together. These men attend meetings six, sometimes seven, times a week. They carpool from New York City to Delaware, Connecticut, anywhere they can find the comfort and love that these NA meetings provide. They have this saying, “all you gotta do is show up. Just keep showing up man… one day at a time.”

That is when it struck me; these men could never find this kind of love and support from a church body. For some, NA becomes as addicting as the drug habit they fought. (Not physically obviously, but most definitely mentally.) “The group” becomes a deity in the sense that it offers salvation, protection, acceptance, and love to anyone that walks or stumbles into whatever four walls are hosting them. Churches have adopted the attitude that non-confrontational Christianity is the easiest way to fill pews, and it probably is. Where does that attitude get us?

Please; think about this for a moment.

The Mormon Church is the number one most giving religion in America. Nobody ministers to the poor and homeless as much as they do.

Jehovah Witnesses focus on evangelism more than any religion in the world. As Christians, we believe that everyone else will spend an eternity in torment, burning in hell, yet it is the Jehovah Witness that spends his spiritual life taking his message door to door.

Jewish children grow up learning Hebrew so they can read the Torah in its original translation. How many Christians can read Hebrew and Greek?

Islamic followers strap bombs to themselves literally dedicating their lives to their faith. How many of us Christians would give up our jobs, money, or cars? Forget that… how many of us are willing to give up a full hour a night to read our Bibles and pray?

Drug addicts can offer a loving and unconditionally accepting community that America’s modern Church cannot rival.

What the hell are we doing? Really. Forget denominations or disagreements about the role of tongues today. We believe the same principle message. We believe that Jesus came to earth to die for our abominable sins, opening the only doorway to heaven. We claim to have “the one true faith.” Why is it that we cannot act out one aspect of that better then the religions we consider to be cults, or just plain lost?

Rebuttal to the “indefectibility of the Catholic Church”

“OT Messianic prophecies refer to an unending covenant between God and His people (by extension the Church, led by Jesus Christ) and the unvanquishable Kingdom of Christ:”

God’s People are referred to as His Church, and He will go to great lengths to defend and protect His people. Agreed. However to state that this implies doctrinal perfection in any church denomination would be robbing mankind of his freewill. Human nature is corrupt and unchanging. While man (through Christ) can be sanctified, his human nature is something that must be squelched and battled every single day. Isaiah 64:6 states that at man’s holiest, we are but filthy rags. When looking at church history, it is hard to come to a conclusion that God directs the Church’s motives and endeavors. There have been priests convicted of child molestation, homosexual pastors invited to pulpits, crusades, and all kinds of other obscenities conducted under the name of Christ. If the notion that God manages and conducts a doctrinally perfect group of people, that would immediately alienate and possibly even condemn every denomination and sect of Christianity with the exception of one. So which one would that be? (You propose Catholicism.) The problem is that man is decrepit, and everywhere he travels his ugly footprints mar the earth. There is no blameless religious establishment. Evangelicalism is apathetic, and increasingly banal, just like all the other related denominations. Catholicism has its issues too.

The other issue about the notion of a doctrinally perfect denomination that contradicts with the character of Christ, is that fact that Christ is unchanging. Hebrews 13:8 says that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He is not bound by time, and his attributes and personality have never wavered. If there were such a thing as a “chosen denomination,” then one would assume that the doctrine of those churches would be unchanging, just like the God that directs them. The Problem is, that no such church exists. You wrote (in red responding to what was written in blue):

“The additional element is what we call indefectibility. It is a root assumption of apostolic succession: that the truth will never be lost; it will always be preserved.

(I agree that with the principle “God’s truth will never be lost and will always be preserved.” I think the discrepancy I have, whose responsibility it is to preserve that truth, is a major one. You suggest that man can uphold and preserve that truth. (through God.) I feel that this idea elevates man to a level that he cannot possibly ascend to. II Timothy 3:16 states that all scripture is inspired by God, and John 2:27 clearly says that since God has given us the gift of the Holy Spirit, “you do not need anyone to teach you.” He is not discrediting pastors, popes, ministers, and teachers, but telling us that once God put His Word in print, and bestowed us with the Holy Spirit, we do not need to rely on man {or institutions of man} to tell us what is right or wrong.)

A church that's doctrinally correct today could be doctrinally incorrect fifty years from now.

That is usually the case in Protestantism, yes; WHILE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE REMAINS THE SAME. So Jason's analysis surely applies to Protestants on a large scale.”

Essentially, you propose that the Catholic Church can withstand the scrutiny of time, but I do not see that it does. None of the Christian religions can say that their doctrine has not changed since Christ walked the earth.

This list was composed from various Catholic Church history books written by Catholics. (The principal book I used was “The Teaching of the Catholic Church” by Josef Neuner, S.J. and Heinrich Roos, S.J.) The numbers represent the year these changes were introduced.


· 300 Prayers for the dead
· 300 Making the sign of the cross
· 375 Worship of saints and angels
· 394 Mass first instituted
· 431 Worship of Mary begun
· 500 Priests started dressing differently
· 526 Extreme Unction (anointing the sick)
· 593 Doctrine of Purgatory introduced
· 600 Worship service in Latin
· 600 Prayers directed to Mary
· 607 Boniface III made first pope
· 709 Kissing the pope’s feet
· 786 Worshipping of images and relics
· 850 Use of holy water begun
· 995 Canonization of dead saints
· 998 Fasting on Fridays and during lent
· 1079 Celibacy of priesthood
· 1090 Prayer beads
· 1184 The inquisition (court to discover and punish heretics)
· 1190 Sale of indulgences
· 1215 Transubstantiation
· 1220 Adoration of wafer
· 1229 Bible forbidden to laymen
· 1414 Cup forbidden to people at communion
· 1439 Doctrine of seven sacraments
· 1439 Doctrine of purgatory decreed
· 1508 The Ava Maria approved
· 1534 Jesuit order founded
· 1545 Tradition granted equal authority with the Bible
· 1546 Apocryphal books put into Bible
· 1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary
· 1864 Syllabus of error proclaimed
· 1870 Infallibility of pope declared
· 1930 Public schools condemned
· 1950 Assumption of the virgin Mary (taken to heaven)
· 1965 Mary proclaimed mother of the church


I am in no way trying to conduct an assault on the Catholic Church. Doctrinally, there are a few issues I would tend to disagree with (as with any other denomination) but I respect the Catholic Church a lot more than other brands of Christianity because of their tendency to cling to their fundamental roots. Personally, I choose not to affiliate with a denomination, because I would like people to see me as I am (a twenty-three year old doing everything possible to chase after Christ and study His Word) without being held accountable for other people’s dogmas and actions that I neither condone nor support. Does this mean that because I am not under the Catholic Church that I err, and no matter how hard I try or how much I sacrifice because of my love for Jesus that I am working on my own, out from under His will? What about the countless missionaries who toil their entire lives (some with no religious affiliation) who are sometimes speared, beheaded, and poisoned for trying to show others Jesus’ love? Some return to their homes with crazy stories of miracles and testimonies of things Jesus did for them. Why would God perform miracles and actively support people who claim to be doing His will, but really are not because they are delusional and affiliated with the wrong denomination? Ok, so maybe they are lying, but I am extremely scared to rush to that assumption condemning all the acts of salvation or all the miracles that people experienced apart from the Catholic Church.

Either God is powerful enough to present different things to different people according to their understanding, or truth is bound to those privileged and educated enough to be fully indoctrinated in the one truth. To declare allegiance to a God of the privileged and educated is counterintuitive to the way Christ has explained His intentions through the gospels. Mathew 9:11-13 says that it’s the sick and confused that Jesus came to minister to. Christ came to the world to save us. He shook the system up and revolutionized the way we look at life. In my opinion, He came to this earth to deliver us, and to battle two different things; sin and religion. Religion can be distracting at times. In Jesus’ day the Pharisees were so concerned with legalities and tradition that they were completely oblivious to the fact that the answer to all of their Old Testament Prophecies was walking and teaching right in front of them! Anyone willing to put the research into their writing the way you and some of your readers do is obviously extremely passionate about their faith. It is my prayer that none of us will get to a point in life where our passion for Jesus and the things of God are compromised by the parameters of religion or anything else seeking to quench the fire that God ignited inside of us. Personally, I hope that the momentum my walk with Christ generates is never used against me to push me away from where God wants me.

Frank

To read Dave Armstrong's full essay, and other interesting and in depth studies check out:
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/