Acts 23:7 episode artwork

EPISODE · Dec 25, 2023 · 6 MIN

Acts 23:7

from BIBLE IN TEN · host Bondservant of Christ

Monday, 25 December 2023   And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. Acts 23:7   In the previous verse, Paul, standing before the council, had called out in the assembly that he stood before them because of “the hope and a resurrection of the dead.” With that remembered, it next says, “And when he had said this, a dissension arose.”   His words had the exact effect he intended. The council had the hope that he would be quickly voted as an offender of the law and punished according to the law. Before such a decision was rendered, the congregation instead had divided right down the middle of the two parties. As Luke said, the dissension was “between the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”   Rather, the Greek literally reads, “and there was a dissension, the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” Therefore, rather than “between,” it should say, “and there was a division of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” In other words, there was always a theological disagreement between the two. However, this separated their ability to sit and reason together any longer.   One can see the same effect today in various situations. For example, if there is a gathering of Christian leaders to discuss the state of the nation of Israel, there will be obvious disagreements during the discussion. However, as long as the main subject, that of the state of the nation of Israel is addressed, things will normally go well.   However, if an instigator wants to start a division, he might inject something – such as the doctrine of the rapture – into his discussion. By doing this, he will uncover an underlying disagreement that will divert the attention away from the original topic. As it was not the main point being addressed, people will passionately divide into factions. With that, the dam will break loose, and a complete lack of control over the gathering is bound to ensue.   This is just what Paul did, knowing what the outcome of such a proclamation as his would bring about. And just as he had hoped, Luke records, “and the assembly was divided.”   The word translated as divided comes from the Greek schizo. It is where our modern word schism is derived. The rending of the veil in the temple at Jesus’ death uses this same word. In this case, it signifies that a complete division of thought on the subject was the result.   Life application: The example of introducing the rapture into a discussion about the state of the nation of Israel is bound to cause trouble because the two issues are actually interconnected. If someone thinks Israel has been replaced by the church, then he will normally dismiss the doctrine of the rapture.   In Paul’s case, he was originally accused of violating the Law of Moses. However, if his hope is in the risen Messiah, Jesus, then that means the words of Jeremiah 31:31 have been fulfilled in Jesus’ work. As such, the Law of Moses – which is a part of the Mosaic Covenant – has been superseded by the introduction of the New Covenant.   Therefore, Paul could not be a violator of the law. He had moved from Moses to Jesus. The council could still charge him and have him punished, but it would be based on a faulty rendering of their own law, which foresaw and planned its own obsolescence.   Even if the Pharisees disagreed with him over this, their own doctrine was still sided with Paul’s overall worldview. If one wants to get to the heart of a matter in such a forum, by knowing the underlying reason for holding onto the various views being discussed, that knowledge can be used to one’s advantage.   On the other hand, if one wants to avoid getting trapped in someone else’s machinations in such a situation, it can be done by quickly noticing the ploy and stating something like, “You may have a point on that issue, but this is not the time or place for it to be addressed. It is a red herring. We need to get back to the main issue of discussion.”   If you are on social media, this type of diversionary ploy is brought in with almost every topic that is introduced as a main matter of discussion. Within a very short time, matters completely irrelevant to the original topic will be introduced, cyber punches will fly, and friendships can quickly be destroyed.   Pay attention to such things, and you can easily weed out miscreants who love to stir the pot by watching how they sneakily enter into any given discussion.   O God, we often fail to think logically about matters we are involved in. People may want to divide others for their own perverse purposes and so they introduce a fallacious argument, hoping it will take root and cause a schism. Help us to identify such things and work to quash their intentions before they become established. Yes, Lord God, give us wisdom in such things. Amen.

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Dec 25, 2023

Monday, 25 December 2023   And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. Acts 23:7   In the previous verse, Paul, standing before the council, had called out in the assembly that he stood before them because of “the hope and a resurrection of the dead.” With that remembered, it next says, “And when he had said this, a dissension arose.”   His words had the exact effect he intended. The council had the hope that he would be quickly voted as an offender of the law and punished according to the law. Before such a decision was rendered, the congregation instead had divided right down the middle of the two parties. As Luke said, the dissension was “between the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”   Rather, the Greek literally reads, “and there was a dissension, the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” Therefore, rather than “between,” it should say, “and there was a division of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” In other words, there was always a theological disagreement between the two. However, this separated their ability to sit and reason together any longer.   One can see the same effect today in various situations. For example, if there is a gathering of Christian leaders to discuss the state of the nation of Israel, there will be obvious disagreements during the discussion. However, as long as the main subject, that of the state of the nation of Israel is addressed, things will normally go well.   However, if an instigator wants to start a division, he might inject something – such as the doctrine of the rapture – into his discussion. By doing this, he will uncover an underlying disagreement that will divert the attention away from the original topic. As it was not the main point being addressed, people will passionately divide into factions. With that, the dam will break loose, and a complete lack of control over the gathering is bound to ensue.   This is just what Paul did, knowing what the outcome of such a proclamation as his would bring about. And just as he had hoped, Luke records, “and the assembly was divided.”   The word translated as divided comes from the Greek schizo. It is where our modern word schism is derived. The rending of the veil in the temple at Jesus’ death uses this same word. In this case, it signifies that a complete division of thought on the subject was the result.   Life application: The example of introducing the rapture into a discussion about the state of the nation of Israel is bound to cause trouble because the two issues are actually interconnected. If someone thinks Israel has been replaced by the church, then he will normally dismiss the doctrine of the rapture.   In Paul’s case, he was originally accused of violating the Law of Moses. However, if his hope is in the risen Messiah, Jesus, then that means the words of Jeremiah 31:31 have been fulfilled in Jesus’ work. As such, the Law of Moses – which is a part of the Mosaic Covenant – has been superseded by the introduction of the New Covenant.   Therefore, Paul could not be a violator of the law. He had moved from Moses to Jesus. The council could still charge him and have him punished, but it would be based on a faulty rendering of their own law, which foresaw and planned its own obsolescence.   Even if the Pharisees disagreed with him over this, their own doctrine was still sided with Paul’s overall worldview. If one wants to get to the heart of a matter in such a forum, by knowing the underlying reason for holding onto the various views being discussed, that knowledge can be used to one’s advantage.   On the other hand, if one wants to avoid getting trapped in someone else’s machinations in such a situation, it can be done by quickly noticing the ploy and stating something like, “You may have a point on that issue, but this is not the time or place for it to be addressed. It is a red herring. We need to get back to the main issue of discussion.”   If you are on social m

PodParley-generated summary based on available episode metadata and transcript content.

NOW PLAYING

Acts 23:7

0:00 6:22

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

MG Show MG Show The MG Show, hosted by Jeffrey Pedersen and Shannon Townsend, is a leading alternative media platform dedicated to uncovering the truth behind today’s most pressing political issues. Launched in 2019, the show has grown exponentially, offering unfiltered insights, comprehensive research, and real-time analysis. With a commitment to independent journalism and factual integrity, the MG Show empowers its audience with knowledge and encourages active participation in the political discourse. Eat to Live Jenna Fuhrman, Dr. Fuhrman Our health is our most precious gift and smart nutrition can change your life. Each month, join Dr. Fuhrman and his daughter, Jenna Fuhrman as they discuss important topics in the world of nutrition. Eat to Live will change the way you eat and think about food. French Your Way Jessica: Native French teacher founder of French Your Way Boost your French listening skills and test your comprehension with this one of a kind series of podcasts. Get the chance to listen to a real conversation between native speakers talking at normal speed AND customise your learning experience through carefully designed sets of questions (2 levels of difficulty) available for download at www.frenchvoicespodcast.com. All interviews also come with the transcript. French teacher Jessica interviews native speakers of French from around the world who share a bit of their life and passion. Where else would you meet in one same place a French yoga teacher based in Melbourne, a soap manufacturer from Provence, or a couple cycling around the world? XXX Tech by SOVRYN Dr. Brian Sovryn The crossroads between technology, sensuality, and metaphysics - and the longest running anarchist podcast in the world! Brought to you by Dr. Brian Sovryn.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of BIBLE IN TEN?

This episode is 6 minutes long.

When was this BIBLE IN TEN episode published?

This episode was published on December 25, 2023.

What is this episode about?

Monday, 25 December 2023   And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. Acts 23:7   In the previous verse, Paul, standing before the council, had called out in the assembly that...

Can I download this BIBLE IN TEN episode?

Yes, you can download this episode by clicking the download button on the episode player, or subscribe to the podcast in your preferred podcast app for automatic downloads.
URL copied to clipboard!