Monday: The Conversion of Gentiles
The conversion of Gentiles to the Gospel of Jesus Christ is an event in the book of Acts that sets the stage for the greatest conflict in the life of the early church, one that would threaten its existence and mission.
Read Acts 10:1-23. What elements in this passage indicate that the Holy Spirit was at work in the hearts of many people to prepare the way for Gentiles to receive the Gospel?
Image © Lifeway Collection Goodsalt.com
The vision must have seemed so bizarre to Peter. He is shocked by it because, as a faithful Jew, he had never partaken of unclean or defiled foods, as the law required (see Leviticus 11, Ezek. 4:14, and Dan. 1:8). However, the intent of this vision was not about diet but about the barriers between Jews and Gentiles that were hindering the spread of the Gospel. Such barriers were at least as prevalent in the ancient world as they are today.
In the first decades, Christianity was basically made up of Jews who had accepted Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament prophecies. These early believers in Jesus were faithful Jews who obeyed the law as they had been taught. They did not consider the Gospel of Jesus Christ as having erased or abolished the Old Testament prescriptions (see Matt. 5:17-20).
Read Acts 10:28-29, Acts 10:34-35. How did Peter understand the meaning of the vision he received in Joppa? What led him to this interpretation?
What we see happening in Acts is that the Holy Spirit had prepared the way for Gentiles to be received into the fellowship of the Christian community. And they could do this without having to be circumcised and become Jews first. What convinced Peter and his friends that this was indeed God’s will is the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Cornelius and his household in a similar way to what the disciples of Jesus had experienced on the day of Pentecost (Acts 10:44-47). If the Holy Spirit can be given to Gentiles in the same way as it was given to Jews, then it was evident that being circumcised was not a prerequisite to become a believer in Jesus as the Messiah. This conclusion set the stage for a major theological conflict among early Christians.
(36)
What I can say is that the holy spirit its still working even today😏 it happens that you are in need of something and God will send someone that you didn't think off to give you help
I can imagine this step in the progressive revelation of God's plan for humans was like an earth quake to the Jews who considered themselves to be God's chosen people by birth.
Their mission was to reveal God's way to the rest of the world.
Jesus warned them that if as a nation they rejected them, they would no longer be His chosen nation. However this did not mean that God's Principles of Life had changed but that His chosen people would now be individuals who accepted Him as their God and He would dwell in their hearts.
Psa 67:1 May God be merciful to us, and bless us, and cause His face to shine on us.
Psa 67:2 So that Your way may be known on earth, Your salvation among all nations.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
Mat 21:38 But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir. Come, let us kill him, and get hold of his inheritance.
Mat 21:39 And taking him, they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Mat 21:40 Therefore when the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?
Mat 21:41 They said to Him, Bad men! He will miserably destroy them and will rent out his vineyard to other vinedressers who will give him the fruits in their seasons.
Mat 21:43 Therefore I say to you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing out its fruits.
Prejudice is fueled by fear of the unknown. As Christians who are lead by the Spirit, we must put aside our fears and concerns when it come to acceptance of strangers in our christian community and fellowship. If we have any concerns about each other we should take it to the Lord in prayer.
When we study the Old Testament, investigating closely the Law of God, the nations were always included in God's plan to restore His image in Adam's race through the gospel. It was the wayward nation of Israel that placed a barrier between them and the nations, thinking God's favor was only toward them. Easy to think like this isn't it? Yet this is wayward thinking and nothing more than another manifestation of ungodliness. This inclusion of the nations/gentiles was part of the “many things” that Jesus could not tell the disciples while He was still on this earth due to their long-time prejudices and unbelief.
So by this incident with Peter, the “truth” of God's purposes for all sinners slowly came to light and gradually was accepted, though with certain perversions added until they could see the goodness of God more clearly. While on this earth, Jesus did leave some lessons to show God's true intentions for all people, but at that time, they could not comprehend it. He even told Nicodemus: “for God so loved the world...that whosoever believeth...”.
When we make converts we are often anxious for them to become like us. We want them to adopt the Adventist lifestyle and do things the way we do. I need to ask the question; how much of that is necessary?
I am not saying that there is something wrong with the Adventist lifestyle. I am a strong advocate for healthy physical and mental living. My question has to do with the perception that new Adventists need to be inducted into the lifestyle and that if they do not respond, they are not on the path to salvation.
The influx of Gentiles into the Christian church caused cultural problems and the early church leaders had to sort out the cultural issues this caused. We know that not all of the church members agreed with the decision and conflict remained an issue throughout Paul's ministry.
Examples of cultural issues remain with us today. The early pioneer missionaries insisted that in Polynesia, converts had to wear church clothes to church. For men that meant black woolen suits - totally inappropriate for tropical climates. (This was not just an Adventist issue; most Christian churches in the 1800s required the same.) Even today, over 100 years later, that tradition still persists in some areas of Polynesia. Interestingly, I don't know how long it has been since I have seen one of our ministers wear a tie to church.
Within our own Adventist thinking, we could probably benefit from a discussion about what is spiritual and what is cultural in our Church.
Good Point, Sir!
When the movement that later became 'Adventism' first started, it was trans-denominational. William Miller and others were pointing people to Christianity, not trying to convert them to another religious institution. The formation of another religious institution was strongly resisted for as long as possible.
Across time, that movement did became another religious institution - initially out of necessity to comply with legislation requirements to protect owned assets, as I understand. Anyone who is familiar with the history of Adventism from the late 1850's onward will be familiar with the many concerns that were subsequently raised about the ways in which still further institutional development was progressing.
I would contend that in many instances, it is as if the gospel commission of Matt 28:19 is to 'make Adventists' rather than making (trans-denominational) disciples.
Adventism has been the source of many good things. But, not surprisingly, Satan has also done what he can to cause some of the not so good aspects of Adventism to thrive.
What would happen if we were to once again hold a PRIMARY identity as followers of Christ, rather than followers of Adventism? In case you think I am exaggerating, think back to how many times have you heard something along the lines of the following mentioned in church: "I interacted with so and so during the week. They weren't Adventist, but..."
Please don't misunderstand me. I am not advocating for the destruction of Adventism and am not criticising any individual. Rather, I am wondering about what would happen if we once again become a vehicle that pointed people to God, rather than to Adventism, like we did at our inception?
I welcome thoughts in response ...
Unless we say Adventism is not Godly,by extension then that means we're lost.
I suppose, Adventism isn't the problem but we the people are.
It is not our commission to make either Adventists or "trans-denominational" disciples. We are to teach them "to observe all things I have commanded you". At this time, that would mean truths as the SDA church accepts and teaches it. We are still in a progressive reformation and as of yet, there is no other denomination even close to holding the truth according to God's expressed will for salvation.
What is "trans-denominational"? (Read Testimonies 6 lately?)
Would you make the narrow way broader? To what end?
I am using trans-denominational to mean transcending any particular denomination. Pointing people to Jesus as opposed to pointing them to a particular denomination.
A few more thoughts/questions concerning the issue you raise Phil, because it has often been raised in the churches I have attended over the past 20+ years.
First, there was no SDA church at the start of the Advent movement, so naturally there was a "non-denominational" appeal since it was given to all churches as a simple but timely message with a wrong conclusion. Today, we have been given a clear and specific message(Rev 10 & 14) not held by any previous Christian church. What would you choose to leave out of this Divine revelation in your proposal to "baptize people to God" rather than the message given to us by God?(do you actually see any difference?) The truth as it has been given will prepare a sinner for dwelling in the presence of God if accepted in faith. Or are you reaching for a lower/higher mark than is given in all the knowledge we have been blessed with?
Did Jesus give us various levels of truth to teach to different people, or is there truly and only one "everlasting gospel", one Lord, one faith, one baptism?(I'm not advocating or endorsing the traditions some would impose on others which in reality are impractical and irrelevant to salvation) And why even form a new church if there is no intent to baptize converts into it's specific teachings/beliefs, since doing so would only bring that church to eventually lose it's distinct character and mission?
I'd just like to have a better understanding of what you are actually suggesting be done, because I can't think of a better message than what God has entrusted us with, even if we have managed to mess it up too often by our unbelief.
“I'd just like to have a better understanding of what you are actually suggesting be done ...”
In a nutshell I would like to see less ‘brand promotion’ of and by any particular denomination so that churches stop mirroring the world’s competition for the consumer to sign up to their ‘brand’. Then we would not be saying things like, so and so is a Christian, but they aren’t an Adventist.
This reply doesn't answer my specific question of what you are suggesting we do concerning those who express an interest in accepting Jesus as a result of an evangelistic effort, if you are not wanting to baptize them as "Adventists". What are they to understand that we don't teach, or don't need to know that we do teach? Is there a more complete Truth than all we have been given through divine Revelation? Or are you wanting to lower the standard we have traditionally required(which most advocating this have wanted to do)?
As for "but they aren't an Adventist", I believe today it is wise to understand a source since so many quote from those who do not accept our truths. I know you are familiar with Isa 8:20, so if someone speaks against the Law of God, are they to be trusted to have light/truth?
By saying this isn't important, we open a door to many perils and deceptions. We NEED to know those that are often quoted, especially in our study guides. A small snippet of "truth" can conceal a large amount of falsehood that some might carelessly embrace because they were quoted in the lesson guide. One of Jesus' cautions was "let no man deceive you". Can we be too careful?
It has concerned me to see so many "christian" novels quoted and endorsed by our own people. The price for this lack of caution will be very high.
Sorry, Robert, I did not recognise that as your specific question.
My opinion is to baptise people into Christ as per the 1st century church. And then to offer membership with the Adventist church as a separate process.
All people need to 'know' to be baptised is what the Ethiopian knew or the thief on the cross knew. Essentially, they 'know' enough about God and His Kingdom that they respond to being drawn to submit to Him and to having their hearts and minds renewed. Baptism is an outward sign of this submission to the Lordship of God in their life (surrendering from the lordship of self) which is the beginning of a progressive renewal process.
As for "but they aren't an Adventist", I was referring to a typical comment I hear made virtually every Sabbath at churches I attend when people are talking about interactions with other Christians. This comes across as though other Christians are somehow not as good as, or second-rate to, 'Adventist' ones.
Phil, I'd like to first recommend the chapter on "Baptism" in Testimonies 6. Next, I would suggest to avoid any assuming on what exactly the Ethiopian baptized by Philip or the thief on the cross knew. We are no longer in the 1st century AD and the Bible has been opened to many things not understood then that must be understood by God's people today. Study the Revelation and see just how particular our beliefs must be for the days just before us, even at the door.
But as a present day Adventist, I really recommend that chapter on the subject, if you accept that Ellen's ministry was/is of the Lord.
When I find out a quoted author or a recommended book is by a non Adventist, I also question the wisdom of such a recommendation. Why shouldn't I? With all the caution Jesus gave about being deceived, why turn to those who fail to acknowledge present truth, most of whom speak out against it?
While I cannot advocate being hostile against anyone for their beliefs, I will urge caution against drinking from broken cisterns. We have been warned that "books of a new order" would become popular in our churches, and we see that often today don't we?
Robert. Thank you for your feedback which prompts me to recheck points I make in light of points of critique.
I have read the chapter on Baptism you referred to. I am not sure what I have said that is out of harmony with what was presented in that chapter. Perhaps you could enlighten me.
"I would suggest to avoid any assuming on what exactly the Ethiopian baptized by Philip or the thief on the cross knew." I am not sure what you are implying by this statement. The thief on the cross was in the direct presence of the Son of God when he submitted himself to the Lordship of Jesus/God. In the direct presence of the Son of God is a place of clear revelation for one who is open to such - as the declaration of the thief demonstrated that he was.
"We are no longer in the 1st century AD and the Bible has been opened to many things not understood then that must be understood by God's people today." Perhaps you could outline some examples of this because I see the opposite. I believe the core things pertaining to salvation were much more clearly understood by the NT writers Paul, Peter and John. Consequently, I find that'new light' today is the re-discovery of what these writers knew/understood in the 1st century (but which became corrupted in the centuries following down to today).
"When I find out a quoted author or a recommended book is by a non Adventist, I also question the wisdom of such a recommendation." I am not quite sure where you are going with this comment as I did not refer to any author or recommended book in my comments.
Maybe one of the mostly misunderstood apostles in the Bible has been Peter; His experience with the Cornelius or later in Galatia (Galatians 2:11-21) has made many question his level of integrity as an Apostle. The life of Peter in the first part is just a representation of many of us Christians today, our traditions and culture at times, are used to block out deserving converts to the church. These traditions tend to make us develop an attitude that grade church members into Primary, Secondary and Auxiliary members of the church raising an invisible but impactful wall in the church. The intentions of culture and traditions was to harmonize people, but on the contrary, traditions today (including in the church) are being used to vet, limit or even hinder new converts to active participation on church activities. However, there is a lot we can learn from the encounter of Peter and Cornelius: -
1. The conviction and zeal of Cornelius to know God and the true gospel, invited the Holy Spirit to guide him to the truth.
2. Peter was to be the chosen vessel to do this activity. This would bring Cornelius, his servants and his entire family into the fold; but at the same time would become a learning curve for Peter on God's impartiality.
3. Peter was a astute follower of the Traditions, and was still struggling with his faith as well as understanding of God's mission (Acts 10:17)
4. The Holy Spirit through the vision, reached out to Peter's traditional bias and got him thinking then made him act (Acts 10:19-21)
5. Peter would obey and go to meet Cornelius.
6. Peter would give a chance to hear from Cornelius; and he would realize that Cornelius like him, was ready to serve in God's Mission.
7. The Holy Spirit would reside over Cornelius and his people as witness to Peter and his followers that God is for every one who trusts, loves, obeys and believes in Him.
8. Peter would report back to the Church of the works of God; but still after outcry from the Jews for his breaking of tradition.
As earlier mentioned, many of us in church today, have struggled between traditions and the mission. We at times believe that people from other faiths are not redeemable pitting ourselves against God's will(Jonah 4:1-4). This has chased away converts from the church. We cannot condemn others by judging them against our traditions or beliefs.
We have to allow the Holy Spirit to regain his people.God is calling on us today to go to these converts, without judgement, giving them a chance to join in and tell us their encounter with God.
We will have traditions today and even tomorrow that may in turn clash with the mission; but we need to keep sharing the word of God without selection or bias. When new converts come our way, let's not use our traditions to halt them from joining us. Let's not even try to rush them into our traditions; I believe there will be much time from there to educate them more on doctrines and beliefs as time progresses depending on their individual understanding (I Corinthians 3:1-3).
In your last 3 paragraphs, I just haven't seen this in all the churches I have attended. I have seen people baptized before they knew the full cost of "let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow Me". There is more of the world's ways and spirit entering into the church and little concern over it. Yet scripture has foretold this.
This indeed,brings me to conclude God shows no partiality to a designated individual/people in respect to Salvation as is evident in Cornelius story.On occasions without number, I've heard many preachers individualizing from our fold categorically that salvation tends to lean only on Sabbath keepers. Now, concerning the inclusion of the gentiles in salvation, does the three angels message only applicable to Sabbath keepers?
As I reflected on the vision of Peter, I wonder if there is a message for us today as it relates to women in Ministry and women's ordination? I can see God's desire for the salvation of all of mankind.
Perhaps we should not allow any barriers to prevent anyone from accepting or sharing the gospel.
Kenneth, have you or anyone else received such a divine vision for the issue you address? Peter's vision was specific and if it included ordaining anyone, don't you believe the Holy Spirit would have made it clear? Also, have you considered the will of God on this matter, or the current public opinions based on the sentiments of the world? If you have a thus saith the Lord, please share it with everyone.
Throughout the history of the church women have been involved in sharing the gospel and leading others to Christ. I am a believer in Jesus due to a woman who came to study with my parents when I was no more than 2 years old. She didn't need the credentials/ordination of a pastor to share the word of God, and neither does anyone else.
After nearly 2000 years, it's now an issue? Why is that?