Feb 22, 2015
Acts 17:10-14


Download Audio:

http://zachadams.org/acts/acts17_10-14.mp3

Calvary316 Twitter Calvary316 Facebook Calvary316 Square Donations Calvary316.net

Outline:


In June of last year Gallup released a poll that should have sent shockwaves throughout all of Christianity; and yet, the sad state of affairs is that the report went largely unnoticed. 


It may be that the title of the report failed to garner attention because it only served to reinforce what many within the evangelical community already assumed to be true concerning their fellow Americans.“3 in 4 in U.S. Still See the Bible as the Word of God.” 


The problem is that the real shocking nature of the poll (and the reason it would be wise for the church to pay attention) was buried deep within the details. If you read the report in its entirety you’ll discover that while 75% of Americans view the Bible as the Word of God only 27% of Christians believe the Bible should be taken literally (down 10% since 1970)!



It gets worse. If you limit these 4 options to 3 by removing the category “Actual word of God, multiple interpretations possible” the numbers move disproportionately the wrong direction.



The church should be alarmed that while 3 out of 4 Christians in the U.S. believe the Bible is God’s Word less than 1 of those 3 still hold to a literal interpretation! 


Now don’t get me wrong as a literalist I fully admit the Bible employs all kinds of literary techniques (parables, metaphors, songs, poems, allegories, similes, hyperbole, even irony); however, I still hold firm to the belief that when such techniques are used the Biblical authors are very clear they’re doing so. Example… Jesus using parables, Book of Revelation.


You see, of the three options presented in Gallup poll, the idea that the Bible is “inspired by God” but “not to be taken literally” is the most disingenuous and dangerous of all. If you abandon the idea that the Bible is to be taken literally unless the author says otherwise, you are left with no basis for interpreting any of Scripture as ever being literal. 


And this has devastating consequences for if the reader becomes the final arbitrator of the text and not the author, the authority of God’s Word becomes relegated to the perspective of each individual reader. The result… Christianity joins the rising tide of post-modern relativism because the Truth becomes impossible to ascertain.


Is there any wonder that as we’ve seen this trend slowly creep into the church the pulpit has slowly disappeared? While we have no reference of a “pulpit” in Scripture, it’s interesting to consider its origins and evolution over the years. 


During the 1500 and 1600, as the Bible was being translated into common languages and being distributed for mass consumption, the “reformation led not only to a renewed emphasis upon the sermon but to the repositioning of the pulpit as the center of the sanctuary.” 


Church historians believe this took place for “the central position of a fixed pulpit suggested a theological prominence of the preaching of the Word of God” within the church. The pulpit grew to “symbolize the reformations emphasis upon the centrality of God’s Word.” 


Which explains why the reformers were known to have the pulpit perched up high above the audience elevating both the man and his message. And while protestant churches since have continued this longstanding tradition of having the pulpit as the central focal point of the sanctuary, the pulpit itself has undergone several reformations of its own. 


During the 1800’s the pulpit (while still remaining ornate) was moved to eye level. Though this still maintained the elevation of the message it fostered the relatability of the man. 


Over the next hundred years, in order to de-emphasize the decadence of the church and have greater appeal to the common man, pulpits grew in their simplicity and functionality. 


Then during the 1980’s and 90’s, as the church modernized, so to did the pulpit. Instead of the traditional wooden-look, pulpits quickly took on all different shapes and sizes.


Finally, as the United States plunged into a new millennia and society continued to shift from modern to post-modernism, the pulpit experienced it’s most dramatic transformation. 


With the rise of the seeker-friendly church model, corporate mega-churches dominating the landscape, and the emergent church having its two seconds in the sun it was during the 2000’s that Christianity witnessed the worship experience becoming the primary emphasis of the Sunday service over the teaching of God’s Word (experience over truth simply markets better to a post-modern culture). 


And almost overnight something fascinating happened… The pulpit, the very thing that had been a staple within the church since 300 AD, seemingly disappeared! In many churches today the pulpit has now been replaced with a hightop table and bar stool.


Don’t get me wrong… I’m not saying all pastors whose pulpits now reside in church storage have done so because of the incursion of post-modern appeal and influence, but it’s undeniable the symbolism of seeing the pulpit removed from the church has historical significance and is representative of a larger trend taking place with this church. 


And yet, knowing that today only 27% of Christians hold to a literal interpretation of Scripture, should we really be surprised the pulpit has disappeared? Why should a church have as the focal point of their stage the very item that represented the “theological prominence of the preaching of God’s Word” when the preaching of God’s Word is no longer prominent? 


I mean if the truth of Scripture has been relegated to each individuals perspective the preacher no longer has the right to assume a place of honor and authority. In actuality, if everyone’s perspective concerning God’s Word is now of equal standing and value, the very idea of the pulpit becomes downright offensive (Rise of the phrase, “The bully pulpit!”). 


Personally, at Calvary316 we have a pulpit anchored to the floor because of what the pulpit has come to signify. Throughout history the pulpit has always represented the authority of God’s Word and has symbolically separated the man speaking from the people listening. 


This is why the man called by God to stand behind the pulpit and proclaim the Truth of God by faithfully teaching His Word is held to a higher account than anyone else in the church. 


Which leads me to my larger point… Because the pulpit contains such symbolism, as a pew-sitter you have a great responsibility to insure that whatever is proclaimed from this pulpit is the truth of God’s Word. “With great honor comes greater responsibility!”



Acts 17:10, “Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.” 



Following the explosive situation that occurred in Thessalonica (where a mob of thugs were searching for Paul and Silas), and with an appropriate fear of what would happen when they publicly surfaced, Jason and the rest of the brethren wisely decided it would be prudent to “send them away by night” to the nearby town of Berea (40 miles SW).


It’s likely Timothy remained behind in Thessalonica to help with the early formations of this new church (the text says only “Paul and Silas” were sent away); however, Timothy’s stay was only temporary as he’s clearly rejoined the crew in Berea by verse 14.


According to the passage, as Paul had in Thessalonica and elsewhere, upon arriving in Berea he begins his evangelistic outreach by going “into the synagogue of the Jews.” 



Acts 17:11-12, “These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. Therefore many of them believed, and also not a few of the Greeks, prominent women as well as men.” 



Luke contrasts the reaction of those within this synagogue (the Jews and Gentile proselytes) with those in Thessalonica. His conclusion was that these Bereans “were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica.” In the Greek this word “fair-minded” is “eugenês” meaning “well born or noble minded.” Note: This is the only time in Acts this word is used.


After establishing the contrast Luke continues by explaining the two things that made these Bereans so very different from the Thessalonians (what made them more “fair-minded”): 


1. “They received the word of God with all readiness…” or literally “readiness of mind.” 


When it came to the things of God these men and women demonstrated an openness for exposition and an eagerness to “receive” the truth of God’s Word. These Bereans processed a hunger for Bible teaching. And yet, this zeal was also tethered because… 


2. “They searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.” 


On one side of the equation these Bereans were excited to hear the things Paul had to share from Scripture, but on the flip side they didn’t allow their enthusiasm to carry them into a place of blind acceptance. In order to determine “whether these things were so” we’re told they “searched the Scriptures daily to find out!” 


Understand… The approach of these Bereans is worthy of our own immolation. While they were open to instruction, they were also free thinkers. They didn’t blindly accept the words of the preacher as if they were mindless zombies, but they also didn’t immediately dismiss his words as if they were pridefully above enlightenment. 


The Bereans respectfully listened to what Paul had to say before going to the Scriptures themselves to measure his words with the truth. They were ready to learn (humility), but they were also prudent to evaluate (wisdom).


Two reasons you should use Scripture to evaluate everything said from the pulpit:


1. Using Scripture to evaluate the words of the preacher will help you determine if what you’re being taught is true or heretical. Side Note: If myself or anyone to occupy this pulpit after me begins to teach a doctrine that is not consistent with Scripture, it is your Biblical responsibility to cast that person to the curb!


It’s a sad but true reality that because there is power in the Word of God pastors have and will use Scripture to justify all types of heresy. Remember even Satan used the Word of God to entice Jesus into sin during the period of Wilderness Temptation. 


Peter recognized this inescapable reality when he guaranteed in 2 Peter 2:1 that “there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.”


This is why in 2 Timothy 2 Paul exhorted Timothy to “Remind the church of these things, charging them before the Lord not to strive about words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearers. Being diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”


2. Using Scripture to evaluate the words of the preacher will help you determine if what’s being said is the truth of God or the opinions of man.


I hope you understand there is a fundamental difference between a pastor who teaches from the Bible and the pastor who simply teaches the Bible. Sadly, instead of teaching the Bible (expositional sermons) many pastors use the Bible to simply validate the point they’re wanting to make (topically-based sermons). 


Now don’t get me wrong… You should evaluate expositional teachers because though a pastor may open the Bible and then teach through the Bible doesn’t automatically guarantee they’re actually teaching truth or teaching truth accurately.


That said… While topical messages can have an appropriate place in the life of the church it’s simply a reality that it’s much easier for the line to be blurred between the preacher pointing to Scriptural truth or the preacher using Scriptural truth to make his own point! This is why you should be ready to received, but Berean enough to evaluate!


Though you may not be able to control what the pastor says from the pulpit, never forget it is your right and responsibility to evaluate the message and then wisely decide if your going to allow that man the all important task of teaching you the Word of God. 


Before we move on please allow me the opportunity to get real practical for a moment.


Seven early warning signs you might want to find a different preacher…




  1. The preacher never opens the Bible during the Sunday service.



  2. The preacher doesn’t encourage the congregation to study the Bible on their own.



  3. The preacher rarely uses Scripture to substantiate his positions.



  4. The preacher openly contradicts essential, Christian doctrines.



  5. The preacher deemphasizes core, Scriptural concepts like sin and judgment.



  6. The preacher spends his time pushing an alternative agenda.


  7. The preacher reacts poorly when asked to validate his Biblical stance.


Eight characteristics of pastor worthy of the position…




  1. His sermons are Biblically founded.



  2. His sermons are more interested in truth than mass appeal.



  3. His sermons demonstrate hard-work, creativity, and diligent study.



  4. His sermons display an openness and humility to be taught by others.



  5. His sermons and his life are consistent with one another.



  6. His sermons do more to glorify Jesus than draw attention to himself.



  7. His sermons encourage the congregation into a deeper level of personal study.


  8. His sermons are transparent, sourced, and open to further discourse.


This Berean example is one of the driving factors behind the development of C316.tv - Not only do we provide the written transcript of the Bible study so there is no confusion as to the fundamental point we’re trying to make, but we cite our sources and provide you additional resources to study the passage on your own. Be open to instruction, but test and verify!


The result of Paul’s teaching and this Berean approach… “Therefore many of them believed… (a reference to the Jewish element in this synagogue) and also not a few of the Greeks…” (indicates there was a great number of Hellenistic converts as well).



Acts 17:13-14, “But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was preached by Paul at Berea, they came there also and stirred up the crowds. Then immediately the brethren sent Paul away, to go to the sea; but both Silas and Timothy remained there.” 



If you recall a similar dynamic existed in Galatia during Paul’s first missionary journey. A group of disgruntled and vengeful Jews who had rejected Paul’s message concerning Jesus not only ran him out of their town, but proceeded to follow him from one city to another stirring up opposition. What on the surface appeared to be mass-hysteria was in actuality nothing more the work of a few agitators. Now we see the same thing happening in Greece.


How long Paul was in Berea we aren’t sure; that said, as soon as the “crowds were stirred up” the brethren once again found it prudent to “send Paul away” while “but both Silas and Timothy remained” in order to continue the development of this new church.


Before we close I want to explain why Paul’s main opposition came from such a small group of rejecting Jews while it would appear the rest of the unbelieving Roman world seemed indifferent. Have you noticed at this point in the spread of the Gospel the primary resistance hadn’t come from the pagan masses, but a religious minority?


While the origins of the “positive review” have long been understood to be either satisfied customers, the owner and his friends, or a firm contracted to flood your page with positive feedback from fake customers, the identity of “negative reviewer” has been a mystery. 


In the hope of shedding light on the psychology behind the “negative review” an interesting study was recently conducted by Eric Anderson of Northwestern University and Duncan Simester of the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management where they analyzed data from an unnamed apparel company that markets specifically online.


What Anderson and Simester ended up discovering was completely unexpected. “It turns out that competitors are not necessarily the ones giving one miserable star to products they did not buy or experiences they did not have. Customers do it — in fact, devoted customers.”


Of the “registered customers” who wrote over 325,000 reviews it was found that 16,000 (total of negative) presented no evidence the former customer had actually purchased the new item they were writing the negative review concerning. 


These reviews read something like this: “I should have read all of the negative reviews before ordering. Please bring back the old style.” - “I ordered this item over your website. Why is it that good designs are always changed? Please go back to the original.” - “I am on a “Made in the USA” campaign and so I’m returning this item. Please stop importing.”


What Anderson and Simester discovered was that these “cranky customers were acting as self-appointed brand managers.” In essence the negative review was simply an outlet by which these devoted customers could vent that a different product they enjoyed or the organization they supported was changing in a way they didn’t like. 


For example, when Harley-Davidson introduced a line of women’s perfume their website was flooded with negative reviews by devoted customers who criticized the perfume even though the vast majority had refused to even give the perfume a try. The data found that customers didn’t necessarily dislike the product they were reviewing, rather they were upset because Harley had release a perfume in the first place. 


As Mr. Simester put it, “Your best friends are your worst critics.” Along the same thread of thought I recently had a pastor friend warn me that the very people in your church who heap upon you the greatest praise will be the very people who will spew the most vial venom as soon as you do something they don’t like. Dedicated people take change very personally!


You see the reaction of these rejecting Jews was so visceral because they saw what Paul was doing as a personal attack. They had been loyal customers of the initial product (the Judaic Law and their religious traditions), which meant when Paul entered their synagogue presenting a change to what they found comfortable (salvation through faith in Jesus) they lashed out, whereas rejecting Greeks didn’t care enough to make an issue of it.


Anderson and Simester make another important observation worthy of our consideration. Though this type of negative customer is the loudest, they encourage businesses to largely ignore them because these naysayers tend to be a small minority. “The other conclusion from our study is that behavior online is too easily taken as a mirror of reality when it is nothing of the sort. What seems to be the voice of the masses is the voice of a self-appointed few, magnified and distorted. For every thousand customers, only about 15 write these reviews.”


In conclusion… Be a Berean! While you have a responsibility to inspect, evaluate, and test everything you hear coming from this pulpit, don’t forget you should also come ready to “received the word with all readiness.” Two questions… (1) Do you come on Sunday expecting God to speak to you? (2) Are you willing to respond to what He has to say? 


Don’t forget our examination of the Bereans was set as a contrast with the Thessalonians. The Bereans respectfully listen to what Paul had to say - tested it with Scripture - and then willingly accepted it! However, the Thessalonians dialogued with Paul for three weeks - some accepted - but a group of Jews didn’t because they were unwilling to change. 


This morning if you find yourself filled with negativity over what’s being said… If you’re taking the truth of what’s being communicated as a personal attack, the problem might not be the preacher… The problem might be your resistance to change!

Links: