Israel 2013, Day 4 – Down The Mount of Olives and Up the Kidron

After writing most of this post, I realized that we saw a lot today, I amazed that we could fit all this into a single day. This might be the difference between traveling with college students rather than older adults, but I will say I saw some tired people on the bus ride back to the hotel! In fact, there is so much here I will split this post into two, just to make it a more manageable read.

On the Mount of Olives

We started the day at the top of the Mount of Olives. As always, the drop off for the walk down was crowded, lots of guides trying to jockey for position along the wall so their group can get that “perfect picture.” Since we have already walked throughout the Old City, the group asked really good questions, pointing out the places they have seen and trying to get their minds around the geography of the city. I had the impression that there were less vendors this year, I was not approached once. Maybe I just looked surely.

From the top of the Mount of Olives we walked down to Dominus Flevit, a small church at the traditional site of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem. We read from Luke 19 and talked about what the crowds, especially the disciples, thought Jesus was going to do when he went up to the temple. One of the highlights of this church is the cave near the entrance with a collection of ossuaries. This indicates that the Jewish tradition of burying the dead on the Mount of Olives goes back to the first century.

The garden of Gethsemane was packed with tourists, as usual. we arrived at the same moment a Russian Orthodox group was leaving the Church of Mary Magdalene, so we were somehow lost in the crowd. My first visit in 2005 you could still walk between the trees, but there are far too many people for that now. Inside the Church of All Nations there are some renovations going, the center arches are being refurbished so there is a large scaffold in the center of the church. They did a nice job disguising the work, but it was not as solemn as usual.

After waking down the Mount of Olives, we were near the bottom of the Kidron Valley, so I marched across the street to walk down into the valley and see Absalom’s Tomb and the other monuments. I have only done this once before (in 2007) and did not think too much of it at the time. The walk then was not conducive to tourists, and it was full of broken bottles and trash. The Parks Authority has done a wonderful job cleaning the area and building excellent stairs down past the graves to the monuments. I should explain that these are all Hasmonean tombs and have nothing to do with Absalom or Pharaoh’s daughter, those are the traditional names.

Another new feature is a stairway up the other side of the valley that end a short distance from the City of David. It would be possible to have the bus drop a group across the street from the Church of All Nations and hike down the Kidron, up the other side to the City of David, then down the Canaanite tunnels to the pool of Siloam, the up the Herodian steps and sewer tunnels to the Davidson Museum to tour the excavations there at the Ophel. That might make for a long day, but quite exciting to me. Maybe on the 2015 tour?

I will be posting a bit more from this long day a bit later. Stay tuned!

Israel 2013, Day 3 – The Garden Tomb vs. The Holy Sepulchre

Thanks for following along as Grace Bible College tours Israel and Jordan. The Dan Hotel is absolutely packed and there is almost no bandwidth for the free Internet connection in the evenings. I am therefore posting this the next morning, hopefully that is not a problem for the reader. I will get more pictures posted when I get to Galilee tomorrow night.

Everyone is healthy and happy, although it is still quite warm. I told the group that everything in Jerusalem is uphill, and they all agree with me now. Kodie Palmer thinks he can find his way around the old city now, so I am thinking of chilling by the pool and letting him guide the group…maybe not.

Day three began with a tour of The Garden Tomb. There are basically two suggested sites for the crucifixion and burial of Jesus. For most of Christianity, the Holy Sepulture is the place venerated by virtually everyone, except Protestants. The Garden Tomb was first suggested by Gordon in the late 19th century based on the fact there is a rocky face in an escarpment not far from the Damascus Gate (outside the city) and a nearby garden with a tomb. There seems to be evidence that the garden is first century, although I find it hard to believe that the “skull” was visible 2000 years ago. Nevertheless the Garden Tomb is an excellent place to think about the resurrection of Jesus, especially since our Garden Tomb host pointed out that the place is not the main point at all, but the person of Jesus. Our guided made this point by simply observing that the disciples themselves never return to the tomb in he gospel stories. Since Jesus is alive, the place of the tomb is not really of importance.

After reading the resurrection story in John and singing Amazing Grace, we set out for the Holy Sepulcher. I am not sure the contrast could have been more clear for the students. I did not check the liturgical calendar for non-Roman Catholic Churches, it is about the time of Easter for several of the groups which share the Holy Sepulcher. The pace was packed! The Coptic Chapel is usually ignored, but this week there was a constant flow of Egyptians. Our hotel has a huge group of Abyssinian Christians, and one member of our group met a Chaldean Christian. While the church was noisy, and the Christians generally rude (by polite American standards), it was quite amazing to see that range of Christian practice in a single place.

From the spectacle of the Church, we moved on to one of the more amazing archaeological sites in Jerusalem, The City of David. we chose to stick to the Canaanite “dry” tunnels, which was a good choice since there were several school groups going through Hezekiah’s Tunnel. The water was not that deep, but the idea of being in a narrow, pitch black tunnel with cold water knee deep and two hundred screaming kids is not my idea of a good time!

They have done a bit of work on the Shiloah Pool (pool of Siloam in the NT), as much as can be done without getting into the Orthodox Monestary’s back yard. We were able to see the end of the sewer used by the Zealots when Jerusalem fell in AD 70, and ther is quite a bit of Herodian stone exposed. I will write more on this later when I am not as presses for time.

The best improvement is a shuttle service back to either the City of David entrance or the Dung Gate. Best five shekels you will spend.

Tomorrow, the Mount of Olives.

Israel Trip, Day 2 – Walking around Jerusalem

For our first full day in Israel we walked around thenOld City and visited some familiar cites, and had a few surprises. It is quite warm this week, highs in the low 90s. Everyone did a good job with hydration, but they were tired campers by the end of the day.

I started the group with Rampart Walk on the north side of the Old City. The Ramparts adage to the 16th century, built by Suliman the Magnificent. This is a chance to talk about the sections of the Old City and get some orientation for the sites we will see later in the tour. There was a bit of a disappointing end, however. I usually take the group off the Ramparts at the Damascus Gate and go through the Hadrian era (post A.D. 135) and finish the walk. But the Hadrian-era gate is closed! The guy at the ticket both neglected to mention that fact. I am not sure who is in charge of the Hadrian gate, but it strikes me a bit dodgy. I would love the National Parks to step in and get the Ramparts improved, including the Hadrian Era Damascus Gate.

Instead of walking around to the Lion’s Gate on the Ramparts, we back-tracked the Via Delarosa to the pool of Bethesda and Saint Anne’s. the place was quite packed, but a large group singing in that church is rather nice. The lower levels were open, which never has been the case when I have visited before. After looking around the church, we went through the excavations at the pools. I stopped in the Roman Cistern to talk about the biblical significance of the pool of Bethesda, more or less to get out of the sun. There was a large group in the spot I usually use for the whole hour we were there.

Coming back along the Via Delarosa, we went into the Church of the Flaggelation, one of the stations of the Cross. This is the traditional site were Jesus was whipped not the way to the cross. I have not been inside this particular site before, and did not actually enter the church, but there are a number of interesting inscriptions and other items found in the church grounds. These are more or less decorative, and there are nor explanations given. Since it was about noon, we did not have much time to explore.

At the Jaffa Gate

From there we visited Western Wall. this must have been a field trip day for the school. There were a million little kids in matching shirts, following exasperated teachers. Every once in a while they would chant patriotic songs and make noise. The older ones were more interested in the cell phones than the tour. The plaza was very busy, although we were able to find a place at the to pray.

We ate Lunch at the top of the stairs overlooking the plaza. I had what assume is the first of many falafels. Several people had the schwarma, it was big enough that two of the college guys could not finish theirs. (If Ben Stout comes home with half a schwarma in his bag, it is not my fault!)

After lunch we went to the Davidson Museum and the Southern Wall excavations. I always find this site to be one of the best presentations of the city of Jerusalem in the first century. The main part of the site is the same as my last couple of visits, but I was able to walk down to the Ophel sections. These are the most controversial of the excavations, especially with the claim that parts date to the 10th century. Seems to be that the fortifications can be described as “destroyed by Babylon.” I wonder if there will ever be a time that connects the City of David excavations with these at the Southern Walls, probably nor wit the very busy street separating the two, but I suppose it is possible.

We headed back to the hotel about five, Jerusalem traffic is always bad, it was terrible today. We will start the day with communion at the Garden Tomb, then the Christian Quarter in the Old City.

 

Israel 2013, Day 1 – We Have Left, On a Jet Plane

We had a great day of travel with no hassles from security very few problems along the way. Our flights were mostly full, but left on time and were quite smooth. I even managed to sleep some this time. It is now almost 9pm, so I thought I had better get a quick post up before I get too groggy to write.

It was very warm in Tel Aviv, 95 degrees when we landed. They have a new system for visas at Ben Gurion airport. Instead of a stamp in your passport, they scan the passport and issue a credit card sized slip of paper that has your passport pic and a bar code, with the dates of your entry. We all got through passport control quickly, so either we looked like a trustworthy lot, or this new system speeds things up considerably.

The bus ride to the Dan Hotel was uneventful. The drive from the airport to Mount Scopus takes about an hour through busy afternoon traffic. I stayed at the Dan Hotel in January of 2012, and I do recommend it. It is a short walk to the light rail if you want to go into the Old City at night or Ben Yehuda street. I am not sure I would recommend taking a large group (skipping the tour bus), but for a couple of people it is a great way to get around.

The group seems to be getting along great. Several were good friends to start with, others just met this week. Dinner was a nice buffet, although Kyle was not happy when he found out the beef he ate was in fact beef tongue. The desert bar got a half-dozen thumbs up, I mostly drowned my sorrows in a plate of hummus and veggies.

Tomorrow we head to the Old City, starting with the rampart walk around the north side of the city, from Jaffa gate to the Damascus Gate. We will visit the Western Wall and the Davidison museum at the Southern Wall excavations. As I have said before, that is always a highlight for me because of the quality reconstruction of the Roman era streets, the Arch, and the Temple steps. If you want to “walked where Jesus walked,” then the Southern Wall excavations are the place to visit.

More tomorrow….

GBC – Israel Tour 2013

I am leaving today to lead a tour in Israel and Jordan.  This is my sixth  trip to Israel since 2005 and I am looking forward to this one a great deal.  I have 14 students on this trip and they are all ready for an adventure.  We arrive in Tel Aviv and begin with a walk through the Old City, the Rampart Walk, Western Wall and Davidson Archaeological Park.  We have a couple of days in Galilee, visiting all the “Jesus sites” as well as Tel Dan.  We will cross into Jordan at Tiberius, see Jerash and Mount Nebo on the way to Petra.  Finally, after crossing back into Israel at Eilat, we get a few days in the Negev, visiting Arad, Masada, En Gedi, Qumran and a few other sites.

Ten Dan, 2011

I am particularly looking forward to the Southern Temple and City of David excavations, there are always and exciting things to be seen there.  One of the highlights of my tours is spending a few days at Tamar, an archaeological part south of the Dead Sea.  The site is small but unique, with remains from the Iron Age (include a small Solomonic Gate and a four-room house), an Edomite shrine, a Roman bath and store rooms, a Turkish water system, a building once used as a jail during the British mandate, and an Israeli bomb shelter.

Look for frequent updates from Israel and Jordan over the next two weeks!

 

Dome of the Rock, 2009

Tel Ban 2007

 

GBC Israel 2005

Last Call for Carnival Links for April 2013

Carnival is Coming!

The March 2013 Biblical Studies Carnival will be hosted by Jacob Cerone at ἐνθύμησις.

This is a “call for links” to blogs of interest published in April 2013. Email the links to Jacob (jacobncerone at gmail.com) or leave a comment with a link. What are the blogs you read this month which contributed to the discussion of biblical literature theology, and culture? What posts made you think more deeply? Send the links to Jacob and look for his Carnival around the first of May.

I am also looking for more volunteers for the 2013 Carnival Season, August through the end of the year are open. Jeff Carter is up for May (due June 1) at his blog, ThatJeffCarter Was Here. Please email me (plong42 at gmail.com) and pick your month! Carnivals are a great way to attract attention to your site if you are new blogger, but more importantly it gives you a chance to highlight the best and the brightest in the world of bibliblogs.

Edited: fixed Jacob’s email

Peter After the Book of Acts

James Dunn titled his chapter on Peter in his book on the apostolic period “The Voiceless Peter” (Beginning at Jerusalem, chapter, 35).  His point is that the book of Acts has little to say about Peter after chapter 12 and that there is very little (if any) historically reliable data which allows us to know much at all about Peter.  Dunn does not accept 1 Peter as coming from a historical Peter, although he discusses the locations from 1 Peter 1:1 as possible locations for Peter to have ministered and he uses the reference to Babylon in 5:13 as a int that Peter was in fact in Rome in the early 60′s.

Any “quest” for the historical Peter will be complicated by the fact that so much tradition surrounds Peter.  It is difficult know when a later generation was recalling a real event or creating an event in order to give Peter more weight as the leader of the Church.  One example is the elevation of Peter in Matthew 16:13-20.  “Upon this rock I will build my church” seems to be a clear statement that Peter is the foundation for the church.  For many scholars, this text suspicious since it is only found in Matthew and sounds a bit too much like Matthew was reflecting the current state of the church at the time he was writing rather than something that Jesus actually said.  For example, Dunn thinks that Matthew did in fact give Peter a great of significance, but this may be rooted in the memory of Peter functioning as a foundational figure in the church.

It is however clear that Peter was a follower of Jesus from the beginning.  Jesus chose him as a leader of the twelve because he understood who Jesus was most fully.  Peter is at the head of every list of the disciples and there is no question that the gospels see him as the chief of the apostles.  The only exception to this might be John, which features the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” probably John himself.

The center of the three synoptic gospels is the confession of Peter, his statement that Jesus is in fact God’s messiah, God’s son.  In each gospel this is the climax of the first half of the book, as Jesus teaches the crowds who he is, after the confession of Peter there is far more training of the disciples personally, and several predictions that Jesus will suffer at the hands of the elders and priests and be crucified.  After Jesus announces that he will suffer and die, Peter rebukes Jesus and tells him that he will not die – often this is described as a failure on Peter’s part.

But Peter is not “succumbing to the flesh” (as John MacArthur says in Twelve Ordinary Men, 37), but he is making a thoughtful statement about who Jesus is (and he gets it correct), but misunderstands what Jesus will do in Jerusalem. MacArthur is better later in the text (page 45) when he contrasts Peter’s  confession with his rebuke, the harshest endured by any person in the gospels (Get thee behind me, Satan!)  But he is not rejected as the leader of the disciples, nor does the rebuke seem to change the relationship of Peter and Jesus.  Peter’s lack of understanding is an opportunity for Satan to tempt Jesus.

The confession and rebuke therefore stand out as an example of Peter’s boldness and initiative – he is the one who must stand up for the rest and speak on their behalf because that is the place to which God has called him.

Obviously his denial is a spectacular failure, but at least he is in the position to make that kind of failure.

James as a Leader in Jerusalem

When I was in Seminary I took a class in Ecclesiology and at some point in the class I shared my thought that James was the “leader of the Jerusalem Church.”  The professor looked at me rather strangely and dismissed my comment with “well, you have James all figured out, don’t you.”  MA students are apparently not allowed to have those sorts radical of opinions, those sorts of thoughts are reserved for PhD students only.

Since that rather kind slap-down, I have had an interest in Jewish Christianity in Jerusalem in general, and James in particular.  Part of this interest is the belief that my comment in that particular class was on target, although it was probably came across arrogant (I was like that back then).  I am always pleased when I read things that more or less state that James was the leader in Jerusalem, such as James Dunn in Beginning in Jerusalem, especially chapter 36, although he says things like this throughout the book.  As we have seen in our survey of Acts, the Twelve fade from the scene pretty quickly – James the Apostle is killed in Acts 12 and not replaced; Luke introduces James as a significant player in that same chapter.  Peter sends a message to James the “goes elsewhere.”  Peter drops out of site at that point in the narrative, except for a brief report at the Jerusalem council.

What is remarkable to me is that James appears as a leader at the level of Peter and Paul as early as 1 Corinthians.  In 1 Cor 15:7 Paul passes along the tradition that he received concerning the resurrection.  Only three names of individuals are included, Peter, James and Paul.  These are the three men to whom the Lord appeared, and at least in Peter and Paul’s case, they are commissioned to a particular ministry.

James appears as a leader in Jerusalem quite early, a point that is often missed.  Gal 1:19 describes Paul’s visit to Jerusalem after his conversion.  He met with no one except Peter and James, the Lord’s brother.  It is possible that James the apostle and James the Lord’s brother are confused in the later traditions, but there seems to be strong evidence that the family of Jesus did not believe he was the Messiah before the resurrection.  Gal 1:19 therefore can be understood as saying that within three to four years after the resurrection James not only became a believer in Jesus as Messiah, but he had already risen to some sort of leadership position in Jerusalem.

What happened to James after Acts?  According to Josephus, in A.D. 62 James was charged with breaking the Law. He was tried by the Sanhedrin and stoned to death. After Festus died, Albinus was appointed procurator. Ananus was High Priest at the time, and he arrested James after Festus’ death but before Abinus arrived in Caesarea. As a result, Agrippa deposed Ananus after only three months as High Priest. (Antiq. 20.197-203).

The story of James’ martyrdom appears in Heggesippus, although with considerable expansions. Because of his great reputation as a righteous man, James is given an opportunity to address the crowds at Passover in order to address the problem of Jesus as messiah. James is lead to the top of the temple stairs and proceeds to preach the gospel and convince many. The Sadducees and Pharisees realize their mistake, and shove him down the stairs, although he is not killed. People in the crowd therefore take a fuller’s brush and beat him to death.  A final version of the story appears in the Psuedo-Clementine literature. There James is assaulted by an enemy and thrown down the stairs. The enemy, as it turns out, is Paul. In this literature Paul is an enemy of real Christianity, as represented by James. He is in fact often described in terms of Simon Magus.

Out of this data it is certain that James died in 62 at the hands of the Sanhedrin. What is remarkable is that he was accused of being in breach of the Law. While it is clear from the New Testament and James that he was clearly in favor of the Law, it is possible that his belief in Jesus as the Messiah and his occasional contact with Hellenistic Jews (like Paul) was interpreted as radical, given the volatile context of the mid-60′s, leading up to the Jewish War.

Was Paul a Really a Missionary?

My students are currently reading Eckhard Schnabel’s Paul the Missionary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2008). I have assigned a final essay for the class which asks the students to describe Paul’s missionary methodology and draw out some implications for contemporary ministry.

Do You Know My Jesus?

The problem I want them to think about is two-fold.  First, can what does Paul does in Acts be fairly described as a “mission strategy”? For example, did he have something like a modern “mission statement” which guided all his choices?  If so, what was that “mission statement”?  Second, and more troubling for students, is that Pauline Mission Strategy something that can be used for doing mission today?  And even if it can be used for modern ministry, should it be used?   Paul’s mission was embedded in a culture and time far distant from our own, so perhaps we ought to find more relevant method that might work better in a modern context.

Part of the problem students have with this assignment is the word “mission.”   Mission, for most American Christians, implies a missionary going a very long way away to “save the heathen.”  Students typically describe Paul as a sort of Hudson Taylor meets Jim Elliot with a dash of Indiana Jones adventurer tossed in for spice, heading off to the Black Hole of Calcutta to be tortured regularly for preaching the gospel. I honestly do not think being beaten and ship-wrecked was a part of Paul’s ministry strategy. Certainly those were things he endured for the Gospel, but I am not convinced he tried to get beaten as often as possible in order to be a successful missionary!

Schnabel said that “Paul understood both Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures. He was at least bilingual, probably trilingual. He was evidently able to function comfortably, without consciously ‘crossing over’ into one or the other culture, both in Jewish and in Greco-Roman culture.” (Schnabel, Paul the Missionary, 329). This is a bit of a surprise to most readers, since we tend to think of Paul crossing all kinds of social and cultural barriers to present the gospel to the Greek and Roman world. But as it turns out, Paul went to places where he would be most effective, where he spoke the language, where he could earn a decent living, where he would be sure to meet people with whom he was already familiar.

Paul most certainly did not cross into another culture in the sense that missionaries do today. If he had, he would have went to north into Germany and preached to the barbarian hordes. In fact, why did Paul not go east? My guess is that God lead him west since that is where he would encounter the least cultural differences. Hellenism was less pervasive the further east one traveled. If he had moved east as far as Babylon, he would have found the remnants of an empire which was reverting back to its original culture. In fact, if I am allowed to speculate just a bit, if Paul had gone to the east or the border regions to the north, he would not have been successful at all that the church as we know it today would look a great deal different.

By going to the West, Paul could settle down in Corinth and Ephesus and reach people with whom he had the most in common – Hellenistic Jews who were already reading the Scripture. He would have met Gentiles frustrated with the “theology” and ethics of the Greco-Roman world and were already dabbling in the mystery cults. In short, people whom God had already prepared for Paul’s arrival as the “light to the Gentiles.”

If this is on track, how do we apply Paul’s missionary strategy? I am not against a foreign mission program, but perhaps we ought to revisit the idea of reaching one’s culture first.

Acts 28:30 – Boldly and Without Hindrance (Part 2)

The books of Luke – Acts end with the phrase, “boldly and without hindrance. Since Paul is in prison when the book ends, it is quite remarkable that Luke could describe Paul’s activity not being hindered. But the statement is not about Paul but the rather the Gospel. How is it that Paul’s preaching can be described in this way?

First, Paul’s preaching in Acts and throughout all his letters is based on Jesus as Messiah and his work on the cross. That the person and work of Jesus is the basis of the gospel is clear from the preaching of the apostles in Acts. Beginning with the preaching of the Apostles in Acts 2:22-24, the central theme is Jesus Christ, that he was crucified and rose from the dead. On Acts 13:26-31 Paul emphasizes the death and resurrection of Jesus. Notice that in both Peter and Paul’s sermon the fact that Jesus was crucified is clear, but also that God raised him from the dead and exalted him to his right hand, proving that he was in fact God’s son, the messiah. In fact, in 16:31, Paul says that the only want to be saved is to “believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.”

It is tempting to downplay the centrality of Jesus to our faith since he is still as controversial today as in the first century. People seem to like the idea of spirituality and religion, but they are not attracted to Jesus – the scandal of the cross is very real in contemporary culture. “Spiritual but not religious” is a movement which rejects religions, advocating love and respect without being dogmatic on who Jesus is or whether there is a God or not. It is also possible to place such a strong emphasis on building relationships and social activities that there is no confrontation with Jesus. Our churches need relationships and social activities, but we need to confront people with the truth of the Gospel, the Gospel demands a response!

Paul’s preaching centered on Jesus and what he did on the cross, and what this atonement for sin means for people in the present age. Paul brought his sermons to a decision. As the jailer in Acts 16:31 asks, “what must you do to be saved?”

Second, Paul taught freely and with boldness because his gospel was based on Scripture. If we go back in Acts and read Paul’s sermons, we find that they are based on the fulfillment of scripture. The same is true for the letters, Paul constantly quotes scripture and alludes to the Hebrew Bible as the revealed word of God.

Using Paul’s sermon in Acts 13 as an example, he blends several verses from the Hebrew Bible in order to show that Jesus is the messiah. In fact, ever apostolic sermon in Acts is laced with references to the Hebrew Bible, whether that is Peter in Acts 2 and 3 or Stephen in Acts 7. The only exception are the two sermons of Paul in pagan contexts, but even there he alludes to the story of the Bible without directly quoting it. This implies that Paul knew his Bible well and was able to apply that scripture to new events. In this case, to show that Jesus is the messiah and that his death on the cross means salvation for both Jews and Gentiles.

Here is another potential problem for modern Christians. We lack confidence in the Bible for several reasons:

• Biblical Ignorance – Biblical illiteracy is a problem in the church, it is an epidemic in the world. Most church kids are taught the Old Testament by vegetables, most twenty-somethings only know the few Bible stories that were on the Simpsons. This is a problem which must be overcome, but not by downplaying the text of the Bible.
• Biblical Embarrassment – some of the stories from the Hebrew Bible are difficult to read in a modern context. When I teach freshmen Bible survey classes, frequently I hear from students, “I had no idea that was in the Bible!) There are stories in the Hebrew Bible that are attacked by secularists as violent, misogynist, or portraying God as a sociopath.
• Biblical Replacement – it is sometimes easy to get people to a spiritual idea without using the Bible. (Using movie clips at camp, teaching the gospel through a secular song or literature, the Gospel according to Lord of the Rings, for example). This is a legitimate way to generate interest, but if the Bible is not the foundation of the sermon, it does not matter how crafty your illustration is.

As shocking as it seems, there are churches in America that do not peach from the Bible. Their people do not bring Bibles to church because they do not own Bibles and there is little need for them in the sermon.

Third, Paul taught freely and with boldness because his preaching of the gospel was the fulfillment of God’s plan. We are looking at the last line of the book of Acts and seeing how Luke wanted to end the story. But the idea that God is fulfilling the great story of redemption in the work of Jesus is a major theme of his two books.

Luke 1:1 states that his purpose for writing was so that Theophilus might have an accurate record of the “things which have been fulfilled among us.” Luke 24:44-49 concludes the book of Luke with the same idea, Jesus himself states that everything that happened fulfilled scripture. Acts is the story of how that fulfillment works it’s way from Jerusalem to the rest of the world, and ultimately to Rome itself.

If I absolutely knew how a sporting event was going to come out, I would be able to wager with confidence. I might even have a boldness to “bet it all” on the outcome of the game. What Luke is telling us in the last few verses of Acts is that we can have confidence in the outcome because God has already planned the key events of salvation history and he has already won the victory in the death and resurrection of Jesus. Standing on the foundation of the scripture, we can have confidence in the gospel of Jesus Christ and share our faith “with boldness” and “without hindrance.”

Why is it, then, that we pretend we are hindered in our presentation of the Gospel?