Edit post Follow this blog Administration + Create my blog

Acts 2

Posted on by John Chiarello


Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

Acts 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Acts 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

Note- on an upcoming video- I have a question for CCPD and chief Markle ‘Why did you draw your guns at the park the other day- after I posted the video about CCPD?’


https://youtu.be/BMQZmqmiYM8 Acts 2



.The cats and dogs all have one name?

.The freedom of information requests have gone out- the affidavits taken- the hour has come!

.Corpus Christi

.Rushing Wind

.Tongues of fire

.Passover then-


.God rules in the affairs of men

.What about tongues?


.Thomas Moore


.Do they really fall down? [slain in the Spirit]

.Shared some experiences

PAST TEACHING- {links and past teaching I did that relates to today’s post]


https://ccoutreach87.com/1st-2nd-corinthians/ [focus on1st Cor. 12-14]



  1. ACTS 2- The Apostles are gathered together in the upper room. As they continue in unity and prayer the Spirit of God comes upon them like a rushing wind. There appear ‘cloven tongues’ like fire above each of them. Why this image? Why not ‘ears’ or some other sanctified body part? God is going to give supernatural power to the words that they will speak. In a few chapters we will read how an angel will supernaturally deliver Peter from prison and say ‘go, speak the words of this life’. These tongues are a precursor to the tremendous fire that will be loosed from their lips. James says the tongue is a little member but boasteth great things, it has the ability to start fires. Jesus said he came to earth to ‘start a fire’ and how he wished it were already burning. Here he gets his wish! Now the Apostles and early believers experience the gift of tongues. They begin speaking and prophesying in the unknown languages of all those who are gathered together to Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost. God ordained this event to be strategically done at this time. All the surrounding regions heard the believers speak the ‘wondrous works of God’ in their native tongue. Peter stands up and delivers a scathing message! He basically tells Israel ‘this is that which the prophet Joel spoke about’ he goes on and says this outpouring is part of Gods predetermined plan to pour out his Spirit on all flesh in the last days. He speaks of divine manifestations [dreams, visions] and carries the prophecy right to the end of the age. He then speaks the gospel of Christ and tells Israel ‘this is the Jesus you killed’. Wow, these guys are bold. Peter leads them to faith in Christ, their public baptism is the immediate sign of their willingness to be identified with Jesus and 3 thousand Jews become believers this day. Now, what is the church? This corporate group of first time followers do 4 basic things. They ‘continue in the Apostles doctrine and breaking of bread and prayers and share their goods with all in need’[true fellowship]. This early community was a brotherhood who actually gave priority to the teachings of Jesus passed on to them from the Apostles. Don’t miss this! Many will develop all sorts of practices and beliefs that ‘make up church’. Some will justify extra biblical beliefs under the guise of ‘the Apostles doctrine’ as in if it were something totally contrary or not known thru the gospels or the writing of scripture. Paul will tell Timothy to stay true to the traditions he passed on to him. But I want to focus on the fact that the Apostles doctrine was not something different then the basic instructions Jesus left us in the gospels. Paul will add to this basic body of Christian doctrine thru his letters to the churches, as well as the whole New Testament. But we do not see a bunch of strange or unknown doctrines that come from this time period. The basics are mentioned above. I do want to stress the fact that this early expression of church life had no ‘Pastor’ in the sense of their gatherings being a time where a singular authority figure had oversight of the entire community. They had strong leaders to be sure, but would avoid the Protestant idea of Pastor. They had no church building or belief in a strong liturgy. The ‘breaking of bread’ was a common meal where they all shared together in a real life setting. And of course their giving was radical, it was not ‘a tithe’ and it was done to meet the real needs of the community around them. All these elements are basic to what the New Testament church is. A functioning society of people in whom Christ Spirit dwells and who see themselves as a real spiritual community of people. As we progress thru out the history of the church as seen in Acts we will never lose this basic mindset. It will be carried into the epistles of the New Testament and remain the best idea of ‘local church’ as found in the first century. There is a trend going on right now in Evangelicalism that says ‘lets return to the ancient practices of the church and see what we can find’. As an avid reader of church history I am not totally against this movement, but I do see a danger in thinking ‘the ancient practices’ are the 2nd or 3rd century development of liturgy and Eucharist and other early ideas, and by passing the ‘real ancient’ story in the book of Acts. To put it simply, some of the Protestant and Evangelical ‘practices and beliefs’ that have developed since the reformation are ‘ancient’. I believe we all have a long way to go, but the ‘low view’ of the Lords Table [low as opposed to ‘high church view’. Though I personally believe in the Lords table as a memorial, not as the actual Body and Blood of Jesus. Yet I personally don’t like referring to such an important practice as low!] seems to be the true ancient practice as seen in Acts. The absence of the Priest officiating over the altar is no where to be seen in the actual ‘church’ setting. This ancient church is really a simple brotherhood of believers having all things common and having the resurrection of the Son of God as the central organizing principle of their lives.




Over the weekend- my habit is now to watch a couple of documentaries from Netflix.


I always got into them- but with the Rocu thing- I can start a few at a time- and then pick up right where I left off.



I’m watching the Cosmos- Carl Sagan [excellent by the way].


Just started Greek Civilization- narrated by one of my favorite actors- Liam Nessen.


And I caught a short one on Ayn Rand- the now famous author of Atlas Shrugged.



I have never read any of Rand's stuff- she is a novelist- and I don’t read them.


But- she is also a philosopher- the founder of the system called Objectivism.


And her works and thought are more known right now because a movie was made about the book- Atlas Shrugged.



Rand taught a system that said mans main purpose in life is the pursuit of his/her own happiness.


Now- she was not a strict Hedonist- she also taught that man should be productive- should be a contributing member of society- and should be free to excel- to ‘make it’ without the state making the rich guy feel bad about it.


Yes- back to the 99 versus the 1.


As you can see- that’s why her work has made it back into the collective consciousness at this point in time.



The other day we went to see my friend John at the hospital- I took Henry [John Henry], John from Arlington- Andy- and of course myself.


The day before we went to the bookstore- and I met father John- a nice Catholic Priest.


The guys were calling John [from Arlington] Joe.


I told Henry 'no- his name is John’.


Henry quipped ‘too many John’s’


In Rand’s work- she tells the fictional story of John Galt [who is John Galt? This sign pops up every so often]


Galt is the leader of the ‘productive’ class in society- the thinkers- producers- etc.


These noble ones rebel against what they see as an all encroaching Entitlement society- a ‘world’ that keeps blaming them for the ills of man.


Eventually these productive people have had enough- and they withdraw from the world and start their own world- based on the principles of Objectivism.


‘Every man for himself’ type of thing.


There is one line in the book- where you have this image of Atlas [the man who has the world on his shoulders].


He is bowing and bending and struggling under this Entitlement world.


The ‘have nots’ keep seeing the ‘haves’ as the cause for their problems.



The more pressure put on Atlas- does not seem to appease the Entitlement class.


So- he shrugs- and walks away.



A couple of years ago when we did a short history of Philosophy- I never covered Rand.




She never came up in any of the stuff I was reading at the time.



Rand was a Russian American who came to the states in the early 20th century.


She saw the rise of Communism in her homeland- and she believed that the U.S. was in danger of going down the same road.


She lived to see the presidency of FDR- and his creating of what we call the Entitlement society.



But Rand- like other thinkers of her day- also rejected Faith and Religion [Marx].


She believed that Reason was enough to establish morality- and build an adequate Ethical society.


To be honest- Ayn was wrong about this.


But- because she angered the Left with her capitalist thought- and the Right with her anti God ideas- well she would alienate not just the 47% [Romney’s gaff] but both ‘47’s’.


Thus- Rand never came up on the radar when I was studying philosophy.


I have not read the book- but from what I picked up on line- I can see how Christians would indeed have a hard time with Objectivism.



In scripture- we don’t see ‘statism’ per se- but we do see a sort of collective ideal.


In the books of Acts we see the early believers selling their goods and giving to those in need.


We read many-many portions of the bible that speak about helping the less fortunate.


Yet- the argument is ‘should the state force man to do this’.


The state- govt. - according to scripture- has the right to tax.



Rand’s argument [and others] is ‘fine- but don’t demean me because I am one of the producers- don’t demonize those in society who are holding the system up’.


Rand did not teach that you should never help another- but she rejected the govt. forcing you to do it.


In Ayn’s Utopia- the John Galt’s of the world withdraw- they take their toys and go home.


From a biblical perspective- we are indeed our brother’s keeper.


That does not mean we encourage people to be non productive- to live off the wealth of others.


But we see the goal of our lives as more than seeking happiness- more than pursuing the Dream.


No- we often give things up- material things- in order to pursue a more just society.


In our World- Atlas doesn’t shrug.



[1587] OVERVIEW- Lets over view a little today- in the last post I mentioned how we will be getting into Marx, Freud and Nietzsche in the coming months- yet I have so many things going on at this time that just in case I never get to them I want to lay out some stuff. First, most challenges to the Christian faith/God- have come from the point of view that said ‘yes- we believe that there is some being out there- God- but we challenge the purveyors of religion and how man has used religion to control- manipulate the masses’. It was not until the rise of these men that the popular approach of ‘no God’ would take a foothold in the minds of many unsuspecting ‘masses’. Before we delve into the ideas and contradictions of these men- let me explain why most thinkers of the Enlightenment did not take the atheistic approach- and instead opted for some form of Deism/Theism. The original debate of ‘where did everything come from’ did not start during the Enlightenment- it dates back as far as 4-5 centuries before Christ- the question is obviously older- but you can read the debate taking place in the great minds of the Greek philosophers; Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Though the idea of God in the minds of these Greek thinkers was not the same definition that Christianity would hold to- yet they did believe in some type of being who for the most part was what we would think of as God- they referred to him as The Prime Mover- a term that the great Catholic thinker Thomas Aquinas would use in the 13th century as he too argued for the existence of God. Okay- the Greeks taught that the universe/cosmos always existed- and there was an initiator who started the ball rolling [motion]. Their ideas about how the solar system worked were primitive- the famous idea espoused by Ptolemy had a sort of crystalline sphere


https://youtu.be/NiQdGyM6mjk History of everything- 2









.I hit the jackpot!





.Spontaneous Generation?





.Latin Vulgate- Jerome


.Church fathers

.Henry the 8th




.Law of cause and effect

.Fossil record?

.Scientific method ‘invented’ by the Catholic church- true [Jesuits]

.The $200 dollar sign to AA


.You all have your own TV channel- for free

.Social media- use it for good


NEW- [past posts- versus below]

On today’s video I fill in some blanks-

As time progressed- and man advanced in knowledge- he also thought we would arrive at a time where advanced civilization would ‘through off’ the harmful effects of the church.

Yet- they struggled with the idea of how a society could regulate itself [moral aw] without ‘God’s law’.

So- some thinkers like Kant- Locke talked about ‘natural law’ which actually is one of the ‘proofs’ of God.

Because where did man- on his own- have this innate understanding of morality?

It’s not simply what they came up with- but it’s imbedded in his conscience [which is another proof of God- why do humans have this conscience? - or self-awareness- where did that come from? Why can’t we really create a computer with this characteristic? A.I.]

This is the period of the Enlightenment- and the Philosophers on the rise.

Men Like Freud [later] would do a grand experiment- saying ‘actually the cause for man’s problems- is this very thing- him trying to deal with the guilt of sin’ [which he denied] and said man should act out on his desires- which we refer to as the philosophy of Hedonism.

He taught the idea of sexual revolution- and died as a victim of his own thinking.

Eventually man came to the end of his new journey- without God in his thoughts- and wound up back at the beginning.

God indeed was the creator- and his laws are the only possible way for society to regulate itself.

Jesus Christ came to redeem man- from the very thing he could not do for himself.

Through the death and resurrection of ‘the Logos’ we are now brought back into right relationship with God- and all the pieces of the puzzle come together [Overblog- see the rest here- https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/01/26/acts-2/ ]

Comment on this post