Acts 8:1-8
Why do you think God allows the church to suffer persecution? Thus far, the church has remained in Jerusalem, but persecution has scattered them in the regions of Judea and Samaria (v. 1b). Is this the way you expected the great commission to be fulfilled (Acts 1:8)?
Notice that Stephen is not condemned (v. 2), but is honored, despite all the consequential persecution. How would you respond to Stephen’s actions?
Saul, who later becomes Paul, is the one ravaging the church. What can we learn about our enemies and how might we treat them in light of that?
Relevant Scriptures:
But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name’s sake. This will be your opportunity to bear witness. (Luke 21:12-13)
When facing persecution and suffering, do you see yourself with the opportunity to bear witness of the Lord Jesus Christ?
Statement to consider:
“God spurs the church into missionary service by the suffering she endures. Therefore we must not judge too quickly the apparent setbacks and tactical "defeats" of the church.” (John Piper)
Application:
In light of our experiences, does persecution strengthen or weaken our witness/faith? What sort of attitudes should we have when we face persecution?
What dangers do we face when we become complacent in our ease, comfort, and prosperity? What state do you think the church is in now?
Acts 8:9-24
What are your impressions of Simon?
Simon, evidently believes, is baptized, and even follows Phillip (v. 13). But what do we learn about him? What was the object of Simon’s faith?
What does verse 22 reveal about him with regards to his faith? Is there a faith that does not save?
Relevant Scriptures:
When Jesus was in Jerusalem at the Passover feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs which he did; but Jesus did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men and needed no one to bear witness of man; for he himself knew what was in man. (John 2:23–25)
What similarities are there between the passages above and the passages in Acts?
Statement to consider:
Faith is not our saviour. It was not faith that was born at Bethlehem and died on Golgotha for us. It was not faith that loved us, and gave itself for us; that bore our sins in its own body on the tree; that died and rose again for our sins. Faith is one thing, the Saviour is another. Faith is one thing, and the cross is another. Let us not confound them, nor ascribe to a poor, imperfect act of man, that which belongs exclusively to the Son of the Living God. (Horatius Bonar)
Application:
What are your thoughts on the above statement? Is there a tendency for us to misplace our faith unto something other than the Gospel? Even have faith in our faith?
Acts 8:26-40
What are the barriers that Phillip had to face when evangelizing the Ethiopian eunuch?
Phillip explains the meaning of the Scriptures, how important is this when we evangelize? Does theology matter when we attempt to reach the lost?
Statement to consider:
All true theology has an evangelistic thrust, and all true evangelism is theology in action...In the last analysis there is only one means of evangelism: namely, the gospel of Christ explained and applied. (J. I. Packer)
Application:
Why is it so difficult to evangelize people different than you? How are we to approach evangelizing our neighbors, especially in a diverse city as Chicago?
Showing posts with label Outlines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Outlines. Show all posts
Monday, July 21, 2008
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Small Group Questions Acts 2:1-13
*We will be reading Acts 1:12-26 and Acts 2:1-13, but examining more intently on the latter. Please read the passages along with these questions.
Acts 2:1-4
What is the significance of the following events occurring on this specific day, namely, Pentecost? What may have been the Jewish attitude during this event?
How do you think the disciples reacted when they suddenly heard “a mighty rushing wind” (v.2) coming from heaven?
Statement to consider:
“The violence of the wind did serve to make them (disciples) afraid; for we are never rightly prepared to receive the grace of God, unless the confidence (and boldness) of the flesh be tamed.”
Application:
In light of your experience and/or biblical knowledge, would you agree with the statement above? Why or why not? Also, please interact with the above statement and its relation to the world around us.
God used wind, a symbol of the Holy Spirit’s presence (Jn. 3:8), and fire, a symbol of His cleansing and judgment (Matt. 3:11-12). What do you think is the function of “divided tongues” (v.3) that rested on the disciples? How might the spread of the Gospel be different if this miracle was not given?
Acts 2:5-8
Relevant Scriptures:
Let us look at Genesis 11:1-9.
What are the correlations between the above texts and Acts 2? What was the motivation of each event?
Statement to consider:
“At Babel the nations came into being, the nations in their religious alienation from God, in all their earthly power and achievement, and in all their ultimate and spiritual powerlessness. At Pentecost they began to be resolved into the "people of God" as the message of the gospel was addressed to Jewish representatives of the nations of the world.”
Application:
What are the differences between a man-centered unity and a God-centered unity? What means does God use to bring about unity with the “people of God?”
Last week we examined the Kingdom of God. What does this event tell us what the kingdom of God is like? Who does the Holy Spirit invite to the Kingdom?
Acts 2:9-13
What is significance of the disciples proclaiming “the mighty works of God” (v.11)? What does this reveal about the Holy Spirit’s agenda? How do we know that the Holy Spirit is at work amongst us?
Relevant Scriptures:
“He will glorify me (Christ), for he will take what is mine and declare it to you,” John 16:14.
Statement to consider:
“So that if the Spirit that is at work among a people is plainly observed to work so as to convince them of Christ, and lead them to Him”
Application:
How does this knowledge safeguard us from mysticism and pride?
Acts 2:1-4
What is the significance of the following events occurring on this specific day, namely, Pentecost? What may have been the Jewish attitude during this event?
How do you think the disciples reacted when they suddenly heard “a mighty rushing wind” (v.2) coming from heaven?
Statement to consider:
“The violence of the wind did serve to make them (disciples) afraid; for we are never rightly prepared to receive the grace of God, unless the confidence (and boldness) of the flesh be tamed.”
Application:
In light of your experience and/or biblical knowledge, would you agree with the statement above? Why or why not? Also, please interact with the above statement and its relation to the world around us.
God used wind, a symbol of the Holy Spirit’s presence (Jn. 3:8), and fire, a symbol of His cleansing and judgment (Matt. 3:11-12). What do you think is the function of “divided tongues” (v.3) that rested on the disciples? How might the spread of the Gospel be different if this miracle was not given?
Acts 2:5-8
Relevant Scriptures:
Let us look at Genesis 11:1-9.
What are the correlations between the above texts and Acts 2? What was the motivation of each event?
Statement to consider:
“At Babel the nations came into being, the nations in their religious alienation from God, in all their earthly power and achievement, and in all their ultimate and spiritual powerlessness. At Pentecost they began to be resolved into the "people of God" as the message of the gospel was addressed to Jewish representatives of the nations of the world.”
Application:
What are the differences between a man-centered unity and a God-centered unity? What means does God use to bring about unity with the “people of God?”
Last week we examined the Kingdom of God. What does this event tell us what the kingdom of God is like? Who does the Holy Spirit invite to the Kingdom?
Acts 2:9-13
What is significance of the disciples proclaiming “the mighty works of God” (v.11)? What does this reveal about the Holy Spirit’s agenda? How do we know that the Holy Spirit is at work amongst us?
Relevant Scriptures:
“He will glorify me (Christ), for he will take what is mine and declare it to you,” John 16:14.
Statement to consider:
“So that if the Spirit that is at work among a people is plainly observed to work so as to convince them of Christ, and lead them to Him”
Application:
How does this knowledge safeguard us from mysticism and pride?
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Relativism: Fertile Ground for Unreason
Note: This is an outline for my speech class. It was delivered on February 18, 2008.
Speech Title: “Relativism: Fertile Ground for Unreason”
Summary of Speech:
In this speech, I will aspire to persuade my audience of the dangerous ideas of a philosophical theory known as relativism. It is logically incoherent, it leads to moral uncertainty, and it is ultimately impractical.
Speech outline:
Topic: Philosophy
General Purpose: To persuade
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience of the inconsistencies of relativism.
Introduction/Central Idea:
“There are no absolute truths,” and “that’s true for you, but not for me.” How many of us have heard these before? These statements describe a philosophical term known as relativism, by definition, it means: “A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.”1 The Sophist in the 5th century are known to have been founding fathers of relativism; their opponents included Plato and Socrates. Today, it flows violently in the bloodstream of society. By relativism, I do not mean that there is no sense in which truth can be relative. For instance, the statement, “the fee for this class is expensive,” can have variants in truths depending on one’s social status. This class may be very expensive for someone who is poor and this class may be very inexpensive for someone who is wealthy. This type of relativism I do not disagree with. These are subjective. What I am opposed to is the idea that conflicting views can be equally valid. Relativism is a thoughtless dogma that needs to be reconsidered. I will attempt to refute relativism in three points: it is logically incoherent, it leads to moral indifference, and it is ultimately impractical.
Source: "relativism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.
Main Points:
I. Point/Argument 1
a. Relativism is logically incoherent; therefore it is not a credible worldview.
b. The statement “All truth is relative,” is an objective claim, so we must conclude that relativism is false. It is self-defeating.
Source: Taylor, Justin G. “The Death of Truth in Our Campus?” 29 Jan. 2008.
II. Point/Argument 2
a. Relativism leads us to moral indifference.
b. If there are no absolute moral laws, than all criminal acts are just as valid as acts of justice. All ethical affirmations would be justifiable.
Source: Koukl, Gregory. “Relativism Self-Destructs.” 1993. 29 Jan. 2008
< http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5539>.
III. Point/Argument 3
a. People may affirm relativism to be true, but no one lives this way; it is impractical.
b. Our own class can never be conducted in this manner. Imagine if Mr. Morgan graded our tests in this manner. He might say something like: “This student’s answer seems to be completely different from my answer, but let me give them the credit anyway because it’s true for them.” This in, my opinion, is chaos.
IV. Point/Objection
a. There are many objections to what I have been presenting, but one that I want to particularly address is the objection that I am being intolerant when I hold to absolute truths.
b. Does anyone see any inconsistency with this objection? Precisely that this very objection assumes that there are absolute truths!
Wrap Up/Conclusion:
Relativism is false because it is logically incoherent, it leads to moral indifference, and it is impractical.
Questions for Audience:
Why is relativism incoherent?
What are the implications of relativism in our lives, if it is to be believed?
Bibliography:
"Relativism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.
Taylor, Justin G. “The Death of Truth in Our Campus?” 29 Jan. 2008.
Koukl, Gregory. “Relativism Self-Destructs.” 1993. 29 Jan. 2008
< http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5539>.
Speech Title: “Relativism: Fertile Ground for Unreason”
Summary of Speech:
In this speech, I will aspire to persuade my audience of the dangerous ideas of a philosophical theory known as relativism. It is logically incoherent, it leads to moral uncertainty, and it is ultimately impractical.
Speech outline:
Topic: Philosophy
General Purpose: To persuade
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience of the inconsistencies of relativism.
Introduction/Central Idea:
“There are no absolute truths,” and “that’s true for you, but not for me.” How many of us have heard these before? These statements describe a philosophical term known as relativism, by definition, it means: “A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.”1 The Sophist in the 5th century are known to have been founding fathers of relativism; their opponents included Plato and Socrates. Today, it flows violently in the bloodstream of society. By relativism, I do not mean that there is no sense in which truth can be relative. For instance, the statement, “the fee for this class is expensive,” can have variants in truths depending on one’s social status. This class may be very expensive for someone who is poor and this class may be very inexpensive for someone who is wealthy. This type of relativism I do not disagree with. These are subjective. What I am opposed to is the idea that conflicting views can be equally valid. Relativism is a thoughtless dogma that needs to be reconsidered. I will attempt to refute relativism in three points: it is logically incoherent, it leads to moral indifference, and it is ultimately impractical.
Source: "relativism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.
Main Points:
I. Point/Argument 1
a. Relativism is logically incoherent; therefore it is not a credible worldview.
b. The statement “All truth is relative,” is an objective claim, so we must conclude that relativism is false. It is self-defeating.
Source: Taylor, Justin G. “The Death of Truth in Our Campus?” 29 Jan. 2008
II. Point/Argument 2
a. Relativism leads us to moral indifference.
b. If there are no absolute moral laws, than all criminal acts are just as valid as acts of justice. All ethical affirmations would be justifiable.
Source: Koukl, Gregory. “Relativism Self-Destructs.” 1993. 29 Jan. 2008
< http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5539>.
III. Point/Argument 3
a. People may affirm relativism to be true, but no one lives this way; it is impractical.
b. Our own class can never be conducted in this manner. Imagine if Mr. Morgan graded our tests in this manner. He might say something like: “This student’s answer seems to be completely different from my answer, but let me give them the credit anyway because it’s true for them.” This in, my opinion, is chaos.
IV. Point/Objection
a. There are many objections to what I have been presenting, but one that I want to particularly address is the objection that I am being intolerant when I hold to absolute truths.
b. Does anyone see any inconsistency with this objection? Precisely that this very objection assumes that there are absolute truths!
Wrap Up/Conclusion:
Relativism is false because it is logically incoherent, it leads to moral indifference, and it is impractical.
Questions for Audience:
Why is relativism incoherent?
What are the implications of relativism in our lives, if it is to be believed?
Bibliography:
"Relativism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.
Taylor, Justin G. “The Death of Truth in Our Campus?” 29 Jan. 2008
Koukl, Gregory. “Relativism Self-Destructs.” 1993. 29 Jan. 2008
< http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5539>.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
