Showing posts with label James Montgomery Boice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Montgomery Boice. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

the authenticity and accuracy of Luke's account in Acts — William M. Ramsay



Here is an interesting story regarding the authenticity and accuracy of Luke's account in Acts. It is from William Mitchell Ramsay's book on Paul's missionary journeys.

The following account about Ramsay is from Logos website:

William Mitchell Ramsay is perhaps one of the most fascinating biblical scholars from the turn of the twentieth century, and his writings are full of knowledge and insight that can only come from one who has extensively experienced first-hand the archaeology and people of Asia Minor. Perhaps most well-known for his archaeological endeavors, he traveled extensively throughout Asia Minor, studying the missionary journeys of Paul and conducting archaeological research, writing numerous books on the findings and adventures of his studies, including St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen. His original intent in his studies was to disprove Christianity through archaeology, but through his research he realized that the Bible was accurate and converted to Christianity.

The following account is from James M. Boice's commentary on Acts

"Acts 14:6 was an important verse in the life of Sir William Ramsay, whom I have mentioned several times in this book. Together with a few other verses, verse 6 produced a change in his thinking that brought him to a strong trust in the reliability of Scripture.

Ramsay was a classical scholar, somewhat like Heinrich Schliemann, who discovered the ancient city of Troy. He came from Scotland, and because classical scholars liked to visit the countries they were studying, Ramsay, who was studying Acts, set out for Asia Minor, what is now Turkey. Nobody knew much about Turkey in those days. Travel was difficult. Many of the ancient sites, which particularly interested Ramsay, had been lost for centuries.

Ramsay began his research, and one of the things he investigated was the boundary line between the ancient Roman territories of Pisidia and Lycaonia that seemed according to an ancient boundary marker to have been between the cities of Lystra and Derbe. That could have been an incidental and somewhat unimportant matter in itself. Boundaries can be anywhere at all. Why should it matter? But there was a puzzle in the case of this boundary in respect to what Luke had written in Acts. When Luke wrote Acts 14, he said that the apostles left Iconium and fled to “the Lycaonian cities of Lystra and Derbe,” thereby putting Lystra and Derbe in the same province. In other words, Luke differed from the apparent evidence and was therefore assumed to be wrong.

Ramsay had been brought up on the liberalism of the nineteenth century. He did not doubt that Luke had made a mistake. He was retracing Paul’s steps, studying the cities he visited and the roads he walked, trying to understand not only where Paul went but also why he went where he did. When Ramsay got to Lystra and Derbe, he discovered that the ancient boundary stone between the two cities suggested they had been in different provinces. But he also discovered that the stone had been moved. It wasn’t where it had been originally. He began to investigate the matter more carefully.
Today, if you read his book St. Paul the Traveler and the Roman Citizen and get to his account of Paul’s ministry in these cities, you will find him pointing out that once again Luke is remarkably accurate. This is because Ramsay discovered Lystra and Derbe were in the same province, the province of Lycaonia, between the years A.D. 37 and 72, but not before those dates and not afterward. That is, they were in the same province in the very years Paul was there, as Luke accurately reports.

We find situations like this frequently in serious studies of the Bible. If you want to seem very wise and popular today, you can gain attention by making a career of criticizing the Bible. Show all the places where modern scholarship “proves” that it is wrong—if you are not afraid of looking very foolish about thirty years from now, and perhaps much sooner, when the explanation of the apparent difficulty is found. However, if you want to look wise in the future, though you may be thought foolish now, you should take your stand on the integrity and complete accuracy of this Book. If you do, you will find the same sort of things Ramsay and others discovered."


Sunday, February 16, 2014

the doctrine of election and evangelism — James M. Boice



“and all who were appointed for eternal life believed” — Acts 13:48

"Isn’t it interesting that we should have this statement of the doctrine of election right in the middle of this great evangelistic story? There are people who cannot imagine how anybody can be an evangelist if God decides who will be saved and then saves them. The argument goes, “If God is going to save certain people, God will save them regardless. What I do doesn’t matter. Or, if it depends on me, then it depends on me and you must not talk about election.”
Actually, those who have had the greatest faith in God’s electing power are also those who, by the grace of God, have proved to be the most effective evangelists. Virtually all the famous missionary pioneers were believers in election.
“Why did they go out to evangelize, then, if they believed God was going to save people anyway?”
That isn’t quite the way to put it. If God is going to save someone, God will save them. That is true. But it is not quite correct to say that God will save them anyway, because when we say, “God will save them anyway,” we mean that God will save them apart from our (or another’s) witness, and that is not true. The God who appoints the ends also appoints the means, and the means he has appointed in the evangelization of other people is our witness.
We are to take the gospel into all the world. But as we go we are to know that God will work through that witness to bring to faith those he has appointed.
I sometimes say I do not know how you can evangelize any other way, at least not in a thinking manner. Suppose it does not depend on God; suppose it depends on you. Suppose people are saved because you are eloquent or because you have the right answers or because you happen to be in the right place at just the right time—entirely apart from God’s election. If that is true, it means that if you do not have the right answers, if you are not in the right place, if you do not present the gospel in just the right way, then these people will perish and it will be your fault. I do not know how anybody can live with that.
On the other hand, if you believe that God has appointed some for eternal life and that as you testify God will use that testimony to bring those persons to faith, the burden is removed and witnessing becomes what it was meant to be: a joy, as it obviously was for Paul and Barnabas."

— James M. Boice (1997). Acts: an expositional commentary (pp. 248–249). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.


Thursday, February 13, 2014

the teachings of Jesus — James Montgomery Boice

“The third part of Peter’s summation of the gospel is the public ministry of Jesus: “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him” (Acts 10:38). This ministry involves two things: good deeds and special acts that demonstrated Christ’s power over Satan.

The significant thing about this summation of the public ministry of Jesus is that, as in his previous sermons, Peter does not mention Christ’s teaching. In the Gospels we find whole chapters filled with Christ’s sayings, parables, and discourses. In Matthew the Sermon on the Mount takes three chapters and the Olivet Discourse takes two. Chapters 14–16 of John contain what we call the final discourses. The reason for this omission is that until people come to understand what Jesus Christ accomplished by his death, turn from sin, and follow him, they are incapable of responding to his teaching. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus said that his disciples are to be poor in spirit, meek, pure in heart, and peace-makers, to live by the teaching of the Scriptures, and to follow a standard higher even than that found in the Old Testament. These teachings are important and necessary for those who are Christ’s. But if they are taught to those who are not yet converted, to those who are incapable in their unconverted state of doing them, these teachings are misleading and harmful.

If we speak about the teachings of Jesus without first speaking of the need for repentance and faith in Jesus as our Savior from sin, people quite naturally begin to think that Christianity is merely about doing good. It is learning what Jesus taught and trying to put it into practice. This only encourages self-righteousness, a trust in human righteousness, which is harmful. Whenever Christianity has fallen into that pattern of teaching it has made a great mistake.”

— James Montgomery Boice (1997). Acts: an expositional commentary (pp. 183–184). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.


Sunday, July 22, 2012

Who are you, Lord? And what shall I do, Lord? — James Montgomery Boice

"When we read Acts 9, we find Paul asking Jesus, “Who are you, Lord?” (Acts 9:5). In response Jesus told him, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do” (vv. 5–6). However, when we read Acts 22, we find that Paul also asked a second question: “What shall I do, Lord?” (Acts 22:10). This is an important addition to the story and a significant combination of ideas, because together the two questions form a sound basis for a strong Christian life…

Christianity begins with the question, Who are you, Lord? (Acts 9:5) That is because the deity of Jesus Christ is the foundation for everything that follows. Without that foundation we rush around doing things that appeal to us, things that seem good, but are not necessarily the Lord’s plan for us. But having established that base, we also need to ask the second question: What shall I do? (Acts 22:10) This is because God has appointed certain good works to be done by every Christian (Eph. 2:10)."

— James Montgomery Boice, Acts: An expositional commentary (155–156).

Saturday, July 21, 2012

kerygma, that is, basic gospel facts — James Montgomery Boice


"Peter had a chance to give a brief sermon in his defense before the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:29-32). The sermon contains what in formal New Testament studies has come to be called the kerygma, the fixed structure to almost all New Testament presentations of the gospel message.

C. H. Dodd distinguished kerygma from didachÄ“, which means “teaching.” 
The latter word refers mostly to ethical instruction, the kind of thing we find in the Sermon on the Mount and large portions of the New Testament letters. 
Kerygma, by contrast, refers to the basic gospel facts. These facts include: Christ’s death for sins, his burial, his resurrection, his ascension to heaven, and his appearance in his resurrected form to chosen witnesses. We find perhaps the clearest example of this proclamation pattern in 1 Corinthians 15. But it is also found elsewhere and is the basic structure for the four Gospels. It is precisely what we find in Peter’s short sermon to the Sanhedrin:

  •      The crucifixion: “whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree” (Acts 5:30)
  •      The resurrection: “God … raised Jesus from the dead” (v. 30)
  •      The ascension: “God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior” (v. 31)
  •      The witnesses: “We are witnesses of these things” (v. 32)

Where is the ethical teaching of the New Testament? It is not present. Most of what Jesus taught in the Gospels was ethical teaching—sometimes in the form of parables, sometimes in more formal discourses. But when we come to this early Christian preaching we find that the apostles did not do as he did. Why not? Did they consider Jesus’ ethical teaching unimportant?

Obviously, the reason the disciples began with the kerygma is that they knew, as we should also know, that a person must first come to Jesus Christ as Savior before he or she can take on the burden of his teachings. It is true that we cannot have one without the other. But unless a person first believes on Jesus as his or her Savior and thus has the new life of Christ within, that person cannot even begin to live the life Christ commanded. As a matter of fact, unless you first confess your sin and find forgiveness, you only go on into increasing sin, which is what these leaders did.

The apostles did not tell the Sadducees to “do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” Instead they told them to repent of their sin and come to Jesus Christ for cleansing from it. That is the message we have been given for a perishing world today."

— James Montgomery Boice, Acts: An expositional commentary (108–109). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Saturday, July 14, 2012

on importance of Bible study and prayer — James Montgomery Boice

"Two things go together in the Christian life: prayer, in which we talk to God, and Bible study, in which God talks to us. Prayer is of great importance. But somebody once said, I think wisely, that when we’re talking to God and God is talking to us, we had better let God do most of the talking. In other words, we should spend most of our time in Bible study…

We as Christians sometimes say, “We want God to bless our church” or “We want God to bless our family” (or our Bible study or nation or whatever it might be). But if we are serious, we must learn that the way God blesses is usually through a study of the Bible—as people come to know what God has written, respond to it, believe it, and proclaim it to other people in the world. If you find yourself in what seems to be a time of waiting or inactivity, redeem the time, as these disciples did. Become a better student—a more knowledgeable student—of the Word of God…

A Spirit-filled church always studies the apostolic teaching. It is a learning church that grounds its experiences in and tests those experiences by the Word of God…

Let’s put that in terms easy to understand: A Spirit-filled church is always going to be a Bible-studying church. Those two things go together… Wherever the church has been greatly blessed, where the Spirit of God has come upon God’s people and the gospel has gone forth in great power and people have responded to it, these have always been ages in which the Bible has been studied carefully. Why? It is because the closer men and women come to God the closer they want to get to where he speaks to their hearts, and that is in the Bible.

What is true of the church is true for individuals also. If you are Spirit-filled, then you will be drawn to this Book. If you are not drawn to this Book, if you do not really want to study it, if you say, “Well, you know, I look at the Bible from time to time, but it seems rather boring to me: it never really does much for me,” you ought to question whether you are really born again. Or if you are born again, you at least ought to question whether you are filled by the Holy Spirit. Because the Holy Spirit, whose chief task is to bear witness to Jesus Christ, inevitably draws the people of God to Jesus through the Scriptures.

This means, among other things, that evangelical, Spirit-filled, Bible-oriented churches should offer many ways for people to get to know the Bible. It must be done through the preaching. In fact, that is the preacher’s chief task: to expound the Word of God. He is to study it and then teach it to others. It may be done through Bible classes and home Bible studies. We are going to see that the early Christians worshiped in their homes. So I am sure they studied the Bible in their homes. If we had been there, we would have said, “They’re having home Bible studies.”

— James Montgomery Boice, Acts: An expositional commentary (57–58).